中国逐步废止死刑之新思考

文章在死刑限制暨逐步废止的理论与立法之考察的基础上，提出我国分阶段废止死刑的具体构想，包括逐步废止非暴力犯罪死刑之构想、逐步废止非致命性普通暴力犯罪死刑之构想、废除致命性暴力犯罪与战时暴力犯罪死刑之构想。文章进一步就分阶段废止死刑配套制度之设计与影响中国逐步废止死刑的两个社会因素进行了分析。     

中国逐步废止死刑论纲

文章首先进行了关于死刑限制暨逐步废止的理论与立法之考察,并提出了关于逐步废止非暴力犯罪死刑、逐步废止非致命性普通暴力犯罪死刑和废除致命性暴力犯罪与战时暴力犯罪死刑之构想,就中国分阶段废止死刑配套制度之设计,提出中国分阶段逐步废止死刑进程中的制度配合和中国死刑逐步废止后的制度建构;最后关于影响中国逐步废止死刑的两个社会因素之考量中,分析关于民意与立法者、决策领导层的认识问题对死刑废止的影响。     

中國死刑制度改革前景展望

随着国际限制与废止死刑运动的蓬勃发展和中国法治与人权事业的日益进步，近年来，中国在死刑制度改革方面也取得了重大的进展。继1997年国家立法机关对死刑的适用对象和范围进行限制之後，     

案件事实的认定方法

限制、减少死刑乃至废止死刑已成为当今世界性的潮流与趋势。而中国刑法中死刑罪名的泛滥以及司法实践中对死刑的过度适用之现状,与当今国际社会法治发展进步趋势显然是背道而驰的。中国可以经过如下三个阶段逐步废止死刑:一是及至2020年中国全面建成小康社会之时,基本废止非暴     

当代中国死刑改革争议问题论要

正死刑改革是当代中国刑法改革过程中最受关注且备受争议的重大问题。历史地看,中国死刑制度改革已经迈入了限制、减少死刑的良性发展轨道,并逐步与国际限制和废止死刑的潮流接轨,但改革过程中也产生了较为激烈的观点碰撞。中国难以在短期内全面废止死刑,但却有必要将废止死刑纳入其政策内涵。就废止死刑的内在根据而言,主要可归结为功利和人道两个方面。在两者之间,人道性应当成为我国死刑改革的内在依据:第一,人道性是现代法治发达和文明进步国家废止死刑的主要根据。第二,中国人权     

“一国两制三法系四法域”语境下中国死刑废止前景展望

如果采用一国两制三法系四法域的说法,那么大陆、台湾、香港、澳门四个法域之间在死刑政策和立法、司法上是不一致的。然而,从一个中国的死刑废止前景看,这种冲突不仅不会成为废止或者限制死刑的障碍,反而会成为一种促进。在一国两制三法系四法域的语境下,中国已经是一个部分废止了死刑并正在努力限制死刑的国家。从两岸四地互动影响、多民族文化交融、国际国内交流促进的趋势看,尽管中国的死刑改革之路会困难重重,但中国废止死刑的前景是非常乐观的。     

论经济犯罪死刑案件数额认定之正当程序

随着废止和限制死刑的国际化发展趋势,我国废止和限制死刑理应逐步提上议事日程。当前务实和可行的方案是首先废止和限制非暴力犯罪的死刑,而无疑应该首当其冲考虑作为典型非暴力犯罪的经济犯罪的死刑废止与限制问题。在当前甚至以后相当长一段时间内,立即废止死刑并不切合我国现实国情,因此,如何从严控制死刑的适用值得思考,本文认为正当程序是有力屏障之一。从立法和司法实践来看,经济犯罪案件的数额乃是启动死刑刑罚适用的主要标准。但是,实践中对犯罪数额的过于倚重,导致经济犯罪死刑案件数额认定方面存在诸多程序问题,因而探讨其数额认定的正当程序非常必要。只有遵从正当程序来正确、准确地认定可能适用死刑的经济犯罪数额,才能严格控制经济犯罪案件的死刑适用。     

中国民族自治地方死刑限制与废止研究

民族自治地方死刑限制与死刑废止是中国渐进式废除死刑进程的一个里程碑式的标志，而“两少一宽”的刑事政策则是民族自治地方死刑限制与废止的逻辑起点；死刑司法限制的重点应是少数民族地区和风俗习惯有关的类型化案件和毒品犯罪案件；由于少数民族没有“杀人偿命”的死刑文化，应尝试在少数民族地区首先废除死刑。     

死刑观念及司法限制研究

死刑问题的争论决定着死刑的未来走向，无论是保留论或者是废止论都有自己的依据。作者在反思死刑存废观念的基础上，以刑事一体化为视角，对和谐社会建构背景下限制并逐步废止死刑的理论与实践根据进行创造性揭示，并对死刑的司法限制进行了全面探讨。     

死刑断想--从死刑问题国际研讨会谈起

死刑虽然具有遏制犯罪之效 ,但其大于终身监禁的边际效益是无法证实或证伪的。当代报应观念早已抛弃等害报复而演化成了等序报应 ,而等序报应并不一定要求对杀人者处以死刑。立足于等害报复而为死刑所为的辩护 ,既不合乎当代报应观念 ,也无法解释对杀人者并非全部处以死刑的现实。人权的普遍性决定了犯罪人的基本人权具有超然的不可剥夺性 ,废止死刑是保护作为人的犯罪人的基本人权的直接而现实的要求。限制死刑的国际标准与中国的国情并不冲突 ,中国的死刑制度应尽快与死刑的国际标准接轨 ,这不但是必要的 ,而且是可行的。中国应该立即着手限制死刑 ,并在不久的将来废止死刑。     

JAPANESE AND AMERICAN ATTITUDES TOWARD THE ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Japanese and Americans are compared in terms of the extent each sample believes that capital punishment should be abolished, Blacks and white American females are more likely to approve of the abolition of capital punishment. No differences by sex were found in the Japanese sample. For both countries, those who are younger and more educated hold less punitive attitudes The Japanese as a whole are less likely than Americans to approve of the abolition of capital punishment. Problems found in cross-cultural secondary analysis are discussed.     

死刑废除的国际要求与反思

死刑废除已经是世界性趋势和国际公约的要求,我国刑法学界已在限制死刑上达成了一定的共识,但在死刑废除的论证上还存在诸多争议。德里达对死刑的解构有助于死刑废除。死刑在关系到社会基本公正实现的同时也影响到社会的基本功利的实现,当其不再是为社会公正的基础或主要方面时,便是其被废除之日。     

简论沈家本的废除死刑观

近代著名法学家沈家本在他主持的清末法制改革中,针对中国古代刑罚的残酷、繁多,主张刑罚趋轻、废除酷刑,并形成了自己颇具特色的废除死刑观。沈家本认为,要在中国废除死刑,必须结合中国的国情,走二步废除论之路,即首先减省死刑、死刑惟一;然后在此基础上谋教养、讲道德、废死刑。     

论我国死刑制度立法理念及其完善

本文首先介绍了死刑制度及其历史沿革,通过死刑存废之争,以及各国立法例的探讨及法律发展,指出中国现阶段不宜废除死刑,但应通过立法、司法等限制,严格控制死刑的适用范围,并对中国刑事法的发展提出立法预测———中国刑事法人道化。     

死刑替代位阶上无期徒刑的改良

死刑替代措施就是在不适用死刑的情况下应该采取的、用来代替死刑的刑罚方法。死刑替代措施应以现行刑罚体系为基础,以废除或限制死刑实际适用为前提进行考察,选择能够直接担当"最严厉"法定刑角色,保持足够的威慑力的刑种。死缓不是刑罚种类意义上的死刑替代措施;不得假释的终身监禁不符合"人总是可以改造的"的基本理念;无期徒刑是中国刑罚体系中仅次于死刑的刑种,蕴含有较强的威慑力,通过适当改良,能够产生足够的类似于死刑的威慑力。作为替代死刑的方法,设置无期徒刑先予关押期是上乘选择。考察无期徒刑在有期徒刑与死刑中的衔接地位,借鉴国外实际执行无期徒刑的经验,确定10年的先予关押期较为适宜。     

Minority threat and punishment: A cross-national analysis

There has been considerable recent interest in understanding how changes within the racial and ethnic landscape contribute to both the increased segregation of minority populations and their punishment. The minority group-threat hypothesis proposes that punishment is one outcome of the regulation of groups that are racially, culturally, or ethnically different. This study examined the relationship between population heterogeneity and the use of punishment, measured in terms of abolition of the death penalty and imprisonment rates in 140 nations. Controlling for modernization, political repression, violent crime, and economic stress, the findings indicate that population heterogeneity was positively associated with imprisonment. Likewise, lesser diversity was associated with the abolition of capital punishment. Our results suggest that definitions of minority threat be expanded to include indicators of language and religion as well as race and ethnicity.     

The Death Penalty: An Unusual Punishment America is Inflicting Upon Itself

The United States is the only Western, industrialized nation still executing criminal offenders. The Constitutional provision that is most often used to call the appropriateness of capital punishment in the United States into question is the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Opponents of capital punishment have often argued various reasons why the death penalty is a cruel punishment, but the Supreme Court of the United States has not agreed. A new approach to abolition advocacy is needed. Since the death penalty has not been determined cruel, I submit a new legal argument based on the unusual nature of capital punishment. Utilizing systems theory, I posit the death penalty is an unusual criminal punishment due to the extraordinary range of persons beyond merely the defendant who are negatively impacted by executions.     

Death penalty politics and symbolic law in Russia

In contemporary Russia there is widespread support for the death penalty. Recent Russian presidents have endorsed the nation’s entry into the European Community (EC). The dilemma is that the price of membership into the EC is total abolition of capital punishment. The Russian Duma is much less popular than the president, even though it sides with public opinion in supporting capital punishment. Since 1997, these conflicting political positions have been temporarily neutralized by leaving capital punishment legislation in place but allowing the Russian president to offer clemency to all sentenced to death. In 1999, the Constitutional Court of Russia placed a moratorium on all death sentences until jury trials are re-introduced throughout the nation.     

Community Risk Management of High-Risk Sex Offenders in Canada: Findings From a Quasi-Experimental Study

Although considerable controversy surrounds capital punishment, there is no disagreement about the injustice of executing innocent persons. While critics of the death penalty have cited the risk of executing the innocent as a reason for its abolition, adherents have dismissed the risk of error as negligible, if not inevitable, and insufficient reason to halt capital punishment. Still others have proposed or enacted reforms designed to minimize the risk of erroneous capital convictions and sentences and, hence, allow executions to go forward in deserving cases in which doubts about guilt have largely been eradicated. In this article, we examine the principled tensions that accompany attempts simultaneously to safeguard the innocent from execution while promoting the objectives of capital punishment. We focus, in particular, on reforms recently incorporated into Maryland’s death penalty law. We suggest that the existing tensions between protecting the innocent from execution and promoting the objectives of capital punishment are so pronounced that attempted reconciliation of the competing interests is difficult to defend, either in principle or in practice.