论“废除死刑”应该缓行

自贝卡利亚1764年在其著名的《论犯罪与刑罚》一书中首倡废除死刑至今二百多年以来,对该问题的争论一直历久不息。随着人类文明和刑法理论的发展,二战后对人权状况重新审视的热潮再一次唤起国际社会对以剥夺生命为内容的死刑的广泛关注。年初,湘潭大学法学院院长邱兴隆又首倡中国应全面废除死刑。一石激起千层浪,国内法学界应者如云,纷纷从法理上、情感上,国际局势上,甚至人类发展史、哲学思想史乃至名人名言中寻章摘句,企图构建“全面废除死刑”的理论大厦。针对主张“废除死刑”者的诸多立论元素,本文从我国具体国情出发,从七个方面阐明了…     

税收犯罪死刑废止的可行性分析

我国刑法废止税收犯罪死刑,既符合国外刑法对税收犯罪不适用死刑的通行做法,又会使我国刑法中失衡的税收犯罪罪刑关系走向均衡;它既不会破坏整个刑法分则罪刑关系的总体协调,也不会在民众中引起不良的社会反响。     

析贝卡利亚废除死刑的理由

贝卡利亚于1764年首先对死刑进行抨击,并倡导废除死刑,从而为死刑废除事业立下了不朽功勋.但贝卡利亚于当年提出的废除死刑的理由,在今天看来并不十分充分,难以应对死刑保留论者提出的质疑.因此,今后再为废除死刑辩解,可从其他方面阐述理由.     

死刑存废论评析——以《中华人民共和国刑法修正案（八）》为视角

从废除死刑的观点被提出来到现在，死刑的存废论争已经持续了200多年。我国关于这个问题的讨论也持续了20年左右。死刑的存与废各有利弊，而我们的目的，则是平衡二者的优缺点，形成一个最适合我国国情的死刑制度，以实现惩罚犯罪与保护人权的统一。在此方面。《中华人民共和国刑法修正案（八）》的通过是一次历史性的变革和进步，具有里程碑的意义。这次修正，通过多个条文来修改和完善我国现行《刑法》所规定的死刑，它对死刑适用消极条件、死刑缓期两年执行的法律后果进行了修改完善，首次对刑法分则规定的死刑罪名进行了较大幅度的削减，标志着理论界呼吁已久的死刑制度改革的主张已经正式获得了我国立法机关的认可。     

死刑复核案件的法律援助制度研究

2007年,随着死刑复核权收归最高人民法院,刑事法学界关于死刑复核程序的讨论开始从死刑复核权的归属问题转向死刑复核程序的诉讼化改革。2012年《刑事诉讼法》规定人民检察院、辩护律师可以参与死刑复核程序并发表意见,但是,死刑复核案件的法律援助问题始终没有解决。2021年《法律援助法》正式确立了死刑复核案件的法律援助制度。就立法表述而言,有关“提出法律援助申请的死刑复核被告人”的规定是多方意见博弈的产物。这种立法妥协存在指向范围不明、条文界线模糊等问题,并由此引发了与现行相关司法解释的法律适用问题,亟需从法解释学立场予以回应。为确保死刑复核案件法律援助制度的有效实施,相关司法解释应从完善告知机制、构建法律援助工作服务机制、保障辩护权利等方面完善死刑复核案件法律援助的相关配套机制。     

Due Process and the Death Penalty: The Role of Prosecutorial Misconduct in Closing Argument in Capital Trials

Prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument during the penalty phase of capital trials can be defined as any disparaging or prejudicial statements calculated to influence the jury to consider improper factors in determining life in prison or the death penalty (Gaskill, 1991, p. 13). Improper statements made by the prosecutor during closing argument may jeopardize a defendant's right to a fair trial. While acknowledging such statements as misconduct, courts sometimes permit them on the theory that the presence of improper statements in closing argument would not change the juries' verdicts and therefore are not fundamentally unfair (Chapman v. California, 1967). The present study examined whether improper statements made by the prosecutor in closing argument during the penalty phase of a capital trial would result in more death penalty recommendations. Three hundred and twenty jury-eligible individuals viewed a videotape based on the penalty phase of an actual capital trial (Brooks v. State, 1977). Individuals exposed to improper statements made by the prosecutor in closing argument recommended the death penalty significantly more often than those not exposed to the statements.     

对我国死刑的思考

对我国死刑的思考应着眼于两个层次 :一、死刑是否应当废除 ?这是理性层次思考的问题 ,死刑作为一种刑罚制度具有一定的合理性 ,但其更有不合理性和局限性 ,随着社会的发展 ,死刑的合理性被其不合理性和局限性一一否定 ,死刑应当废除 ;二、死刑是否能够废除 ?这是现实层次考察的问题。我国社会存在因素和社会意识因素决定了现阶段不能废除死刑 ,而在今后多长时间内废除死刑取决于现阶段刑事立法和死刑适用状况中两个支撑点 :(一 )要解决刑事立法者和司法工作者对死刑认识方面的问题 ;(二 )要淡化广大民众崇尚重刑、迷信死刑的观念。     

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。     

日本死刑若干问题思考

前言法国著名作家、哲学家阿尔伯特·加缪 1 957年发表《断头台的反思》①一文 ,讲述他父亲的一则故事。加缪虽没有见过父亲 ,但这则轶闻不但使他了解了父亲 ,而且痛感死刑的荒诞性。文章要义如下 :第一次世界大战后不久 ,在阿尔及尔发生一起耸人听闻的案件 :一个村民的全家包括父母和孩童全部被人残忍地杀死 ,财物也全部被掳走。凶手也是一个村民 ,被阿尔及尔法庭判处死刑。人们说 ,即使把这个恶魔斩首 ,也太轻饶他了。加缪的父亲也这样认为 ,并为那些被杀害的幼小孩童深深痛惜。因此 ,他平生里第一次决定去亲睹处决凶手的现场。他半夜起来…     

Frontloading Mitigation: The "Legal" and the "Human" in Death Penalty Defense

The bifurcation of capital trials into determinations of guilt and sentencing presents defense advocates with what seem to be two distinct domains of knowledge—one apparently "legal" in character, the other "human." But this epistemological division is actually not so clear in practice. This article dissects the procedural and strategic mechanisms through which these two domains unsettle and reconstitute the other. I provide a historical, empirically grounded account that explicitly articulates the connections between developments in legal procedure, prevailing standards of care concerning the need to conduct humanistic investigations of mitigating factors, and the on-the-ground trial practice of "frontloading" as a defense strategy. Drawing from documentary research, interview data with leading capital defense practitioners, and analytical observations based on my own experience as a mitigation specialist, this article presents itself as a case study of the processes of mutually constitutive rupturing that reconfigure the categories of the legal and the human.     

Siting the Death Penalty Internationally

We examine sources of variation in possession and use of the death penalty using data drawn from 193 nations in order to test theories of punishment. We find the death penalty to be rooted in a country's legal and political systems, and to be influenced by its religious traditions. A country's level of economic development, its educational attainment, and its religious composition shape its political institutions and practices, indirectly affecting its use of the death penalty. The article concludes by discussing likely future trends.     

Contractualism and the Death Penalty

It is a truism that there are erroneous convictions in criminal trials. Recent legal findings show that 3.3% to 5% of all convictions in capital rape-murder cases in the U.S. in the 1980s were erroneous convictions. Given this fact, what normative conclusions can be drawn? First, the article argues that a moderately revised version of Scanlon’s contractualism offers an attractive moral vision that is different from utilitarianism or other consequentialist theories, or from purely deontological theories. It then brings this version of Scanlonian contractualism to bear on the question of whether the death penalty, life imprisonment, long sentences, or shorter sentences can be justified, given that there is a non-negligible rate of erroneous conviction. Contractualism holds that a permissible act must be justifiable to everyone affected by it. Yet, given the non-negligible rate of erroneous conviction, it is unjustifiable to mete out the death penalty, because such a punishment is not justifiable to innocent murder convicts. It is further argued that life imprisonment will probably not be justified (unless lowering the sentence to a long sentence will drastically increase the murder rate). However, whether this line of argument could be further extended would depend on the impact of lowering sentences on communal security.     

死刑:一种残酷的刑罚

残酷刑罚是不尊重罪犯尊严和人格,或者剥夺或限制罪犯不应剥夺或限制的权利,或者无助于实现使罪犯成为新人要求的,或者造成罪犯肉体或精神上极度痛苦的不必要的刑罚。残酷刑罚的认定有绝对性和相对性两个标准。无论从绝对性还是相对性标准看,死刑都是一种残酷的刑罚。     

Race and the Death Penalty

Abstract

Scholars have learned a great deal about race and the death penalty. Yet the field has limitations: (1) prior research focuses on African Americans and Hispanics but ignores Asian Americans; (2) researchers have not explored Donald Black's (1989) plan to eliminate discrimination called the “desocialization of law.” Black notes that jurors who do not know the race of the offender and victim cannot discriminate. Black then outlines proposals aimed at removing race information from trials, while still providing jurors with relevant legal information. We address both issues through an experiment in which mock jurors (N = 1,233 students) recommended a sentence in a capital murder trial consisting of four conditions: (1) Asian American-white; (2) white-Asian American; (3) African American-white; (4) race of offender and victim unknown. The results suggest that Asian Americans are treated the same as whites, while African Americans continue to suffer from discrimination. Here, we consider the potential role of social status in such outcomes. The results also suggest that African American offenders and unknown offenders face the same odds of a death sentence. Here, we consider two potential interpretations. On one hand, jurors in the unknown condition could have seen an African American offender and a white victim in their “mind's eye,” effectively merging the conditions. On the other hand, death sentences could be the same in the conditions for distinct reasons: Death sentences could be high in the unknown condition because of relational distance between the juror and offender, while death sentences could be high in the African American-white condition because of discrimination. We conclude by considering the theoretical and public policy implications of both the central findings.     

刑罚人道主义与死刑制度检讨

本文简要论述了刑罚人道主义兴起的原因和思想内涵,并以此为视角检讨我国的死刑制度。     

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.