“黑哨”行为不能以犯罪论处

"黑哨"行为不仅备受足球运动领域有关人士的关注,而且,在法学界亦为百家争鸣.为数不少的学者认为,黑哨行为已构成受贿罪或公司、企业人员受贿罪.对于黑哨行为,本文作者认为不能以犯罪论处.对于前者(受贿罪),作者从黑哨裁判员的独特身份及明确中国足协的性质,黑哨裁判员与中国足协之间的关系以及足球裁判员受足协之托裁决比赛的行为等角度出发,否定了黑哨裁判员的受贿罪的主体资格.而对于后者(公司、企业人员受贿罪)作者则认为足球裁判员是履行其与中国足协所签订的合同关系.因而不符合犯罪构成的主体要件.

"Black Sentry Post" Is not Crime

The black sentry post behavior is not merely concerned by the domain relevant personages of football fully, and also in order to let a hundred schools contend in the law circle. The scholar coming up to a large number thinks that the black sentry post behavior has already formed acceptance of bribes or personnel's acceptance of bribes of company, enterprise. To black sentry post behaviors, the author doesn't think it should be punished as crime. To the former, the author makes the nature of Chinese Football Association (CFA) clear from the unique identity of the black sentry post referee, the black sentry post referee is awarded with the relation between CFA and football referee that the angles, such as behavior of the match, etc. Set out by the support of the football association; have denied the subject qualification of the acceptance of bribes of the black sentry post referee. To the latter, the author thinks that the football referee fulfils its contract obligation signed with CFA, therefore doesn't accord with the subject qualification of personnel's acceptance of bribes of company, enterprise.