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。     

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.     

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。     

契约主义与死刑

契约主义死刑观有着悠久的思想史传统——从最早的苏格拉底到近代启蒙哲学家。首先梳理历史上围绕死刑的几个主要的契约主义论证,发现古典契约论者在死刑存废问题上无法达成共识,究其根源有三:自然状态的不确定性、立约者的人格差异性和自利假设。与基于自利的契约主义不同,罗尔斯式契约主义的基础是公平的互惠合作,再加上无知之幕的设置,因此可以克服上述困难。通过运用罗尔斯式契约主义的分析方法,可以推出,无知之幕背后的立约者将理性地反对死刑。但是这种契约主义刑罚理论无法适用于非立约者的情形——即所谓的非合作者问题。     

Religious Characteristics and the Death Penalty

Using one mock trial scenario, this study investigated whether religious and demographic factors were related to death penalty attitudes and sentencing verdicts. Those who favored the death penalty differed from those who had doubts about the penalty in gender, affiliation, fundamentalism, evangelism, literal Biblical interpretism, beliefs about God’s attitudes toward murders, and perceptions of how their religious groups felt about the death penalty. These relationships generally held after mock jurors were death qualified. Gender, fundamentalism, literal interpretism, beliefs about God’s death penalty position, and perceptions of how one’s religious group felt about the death penalty predicted death penalty sentencing verdicts. Future research could determine whether using peremptory challenges to exclude potential jurors based on religion can help lawyers choose a more favorable jury. The present research was supported by the National Science Foundation award number 0351811, the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, the American Psychology-Law Society, and the University of Nebraska Law-Psychology Program. This research was presented at the 2006 conference of the American Psychology-Law Society. The authors are grateful for the research assistance of Nick Fanning and Beth Herschlag and for the helpful comments from Brian Bornstein, Rich Wiener, Bob Schopp, Dick Dienstbier, and several anonymous reviewers.     

Karl Marx and the Death Penalty

This study is a Marxist analysis of capital punishment or the death penalty. The only detailed treatment of the subject by Marx appeared in an article published in the New York Daily Tribune, February 18, 1853, and that treatment was only a sketch. Thus, the following study is an attempt to suggest what a reading of Marx may contribute to an understanding of capital punishment. I conclude that abolition of the death penalty does not need a Marxist justification, but a Marxist justification adds to the many arguments for that course of action.     

死刑民意调查研究

目前,广大民众对死刑的支持仅是一种“感性的”认识。通过实证调查可知,文化水平的高低基本上不会影响人们对死刑支持率的高低,不同职业也基本上不会影响人们对死刑的态度。因此,那种寄希望于将来人们文化水平提高、社会精神文明程度的提高而使人们放弃对死刑支持态度的观点就显得不切实际。切实可行的做法是：以主张限制及废除死刑的学者为先锋,以政府及媒体为主力军,首先从大学生及中小学生入手加大对死刑的宣传力度与广度,使广大民众早日对死刑有一个全面的、正确的认识,从而使“民意”不再成为我国废除死刑道路上的障碍。     

Death as a Penalty and the Fantasy of Instant Death

In this essay I take up the question of how death can be a penalty, given that each of us will eventually die. I argue that capital punishment in the United States rests on contradictory demands for painless death delivered humanely through pharmaceuticals and yet denies the accused the possibility of natural death. The death penalty must be at once humane and punishing. Analyzing what we mean by ‘botched’ executions, along with the language of the Supreme Court in upholding lethal injection as a humane application of the death penalty, I argue that the fantasy of instant death is at the heart of the tension between death as painless and death as penalty. In the end, I turn to Derrida’s Death Penalty Seminar Volume One, particularly his discussion of Kant’s defence of the capital punishment, and the pivotal role of time in his discussion. Finally, I suggest that the fantasies of instantaneous death and our technological mastery of it result in the fantasy of the ‘good’ punishing death.     

死刑的德性

死刑在道德上是一种不能证明其正当性的刑罚。既然如此 ,在中国 ,废除死刑是一种合理的选择。但是 ,中国尚不具备废除死刑的人文基础与信仰理念 ,而且 ,在威慑主义刑罚理念的支撑下 ,中国的刑事立法与刑事司法倚重死刑的适用。这就决定了中国要废除死刑困难重重。     

论死刑的正确适用

本文紧紧围绕刑法关于死刑和量刑的有关规定 ,在澄清和阐明刑法相关基本理论基础上 ,明确提出并深入论证了五个问题 :(1)罪名与罪行的关系 ,法定刑是判断罪行轻重的唯一标准 ,法定最高刑为死刑是“罪行极其严重”的标志 ,对于罪行极其严重的犯罪分子 ,不判处死刑的选择范围宽于判处死刑 ;(2 )量刑情节是决定可否判处死刑的唯一根据 ,如果案件不具有从重处罚情节或者具有从轻、减轻处罚情节 ,决不能对犯罪分子适用死刑 ;(3)即使是应当判处死刑的犯罪分子 ,具有从宽处罚情节的 ,都属于“不是必须立即执行”的范围 ,只能对之适用“死缓” ;(4 )禁止将同一罪行的定罪情节重复评价为从重处罚情节 ,摆脱故意杀人罪“优先适用死刑”的理论羁绊 ,是防止死刑滥用的当务之急 ;(5 )我国刑法关于量刑情节的规定具有明显的轻刑主义倾向 ,不应当判处死刑的机率远远高于应当判处死刑 ,严格根据案件确有的量刑情节适用刑罚 ,是避免滥用死刑的重要保障。作者认为 ,死刑的存废受制于我国社会政治、经济和文化的发展状况 ,虽然主张经过一个相当时期的社会发展 ,逐步在中国废止死刑 ,但是又认为在现行刑法的框架内 ,破除传统的思维定式和摆脱错误的理论误导 ,探索依法控制死刑的科学方法 ,建立防范死刑滥用有效机制 ,是当前     

收回死刑复核权面临的难题及其破解

最高人民法院收回死刑复核权意义重大,但可能存在政治风险、职能难题、整体性问题和程序性障碍。应对难题的原则与对策:一是系统思维、综合治理。尤其强调观念的转变、审判独立性的保障以及死刑替代措施的跟进;二是逐步推进、有利有节;三是技术处理、区别对待;四是分级负责、责任下沉、责任明确。为此,必须完善死刑复核程序。包括准确界定最高法院复核责任,确定适当的复核审审理方式,限定复核时间,允许辩护律师与检察官参加复核程序等。必须完善死刑案件二审程序,包括实行开庭审理及有重点的全面审理方式,同时应当适当调整二审审理期限。还必须改革、完善直接影响死刑案件质量的相关制度,包括从多方面完善证据规则,改革审判委员会制度以及禁止再审改判死刑等。     

死刑的程序之维

死刑正当程序的必要性在于防止错杀与滥杀。死刑的正当程序既要满足普通司法规则,又是一种特殊、烦琐与代价高昂的程序。中国现行的死刑司法,未能充分满足普通司法规则,缺乏正当程序所应有的特殊性,且过于简化而代价低廉,因而不符合正当程序的要求。为了有效地防止错杀与滥杀,最大限度地减少死刑的适用,中国的死刑司法应该从正当程序的要求出发,尽快实现程序的正当化。     

死刑条款的体系解释

文章运用体系解释的方法,将刑法分则中的死刑条款作为一个体系看待,阐述死刑司法适用的规则,并对死刑立法的合理性问题进行了新的分析.     

论死刑案件的量刑

死刑是一种最严厉的刑罚方法,死刑制度是一项极其重要的刑事司法制度。把握好死刑案件的量刑,对于实现罪责刑均衡进而实现刑事法治至关重要。死刑案件的量刑应秉持责任主义观念,以责任刑制约预防刑,综合考虑量刑的法律效果、政治效果和社会效果,追求个案量刑的综合平衡,并辅之以隔离式相对独立的量刑程序,改善当前死刑案件的审理现状和量刑情况,严格控制和审慎适用死刑,以实现司法的公平公正。