食品安全的刑法保障之评析:以《刑法修正案(八)》为视角

我国食品安全的刑法规制经历了一个较长的发展过程,1997年刑法规定了生产、销售不符合卫生标准的食品罪,生产、销售有毒、有害食品罪两个罪名,2011年刑法修正案(八)对上述两个罪名进行了修订,并新增了食品安全监管失职罪.整体上看,刑法修正案(八)便利了司法机关打击食品安全领域犯罪行为,但是其违背刑法谦抑性、过分关注民意、罪名的新增违背刑事立法类型化之本旨等缺陷还是显而易见的.     

“禁止令”制度的价值与有效运行途径之探究

《中华人民共和国刑法修正案(八)》(以下简称《刑法修正案(八)》)对管制犯、缓刑犯具体执行监管措施进行革新,创设禁止令制度。所谓禁止令,即对判处管制、宣告缓刑的犯罪分子,人民法院可以根据犯罪情况,同时禁止其在     

刑法职业禁止令的性质及司法适用探析

《刑法修正案(九)》所增设的刑法职业禁止令属于保安处分措施.其适用于利用职业便利或者违背职业特定义务要求而实施犯罪被判处刑罚,且在刑罚执行完毕或者被假释之后短期内仍有可能实施危害社会行为的人.职业便利不仅包括职务便利,也包括与职务行为没有关系的便利;刑罚包括拘役、有期徒刑、罚金;假释之日指假释裁定送达之日;人包括自然人和单位.在刑罚执行完毕或者被假释之时,应由人民法院根据行为人的具体情况,确定是否执行刑法职业禁止令及执行的期限和地点.违反刑法职业禁止令的,根据不同情况给予行政处罚或者刑事处罚.     

危害食品安全犯罪的司法认定简

在危害食品安全行为的罪与非罪上,犯罪构成是我们应坚持的标准,而《刑法》第13条的“但书”也是一个基本法律依据。就非渎职型危害食品安全犯罪而言,生产、销售不符合安全标准的食品罪和生产、销售有毒、有害食品罪与有待立法增设的运输、储存不符合安全标准的食品、有毒、有害食品罪。因危险犯与数额犯的区别而在犯罪阶段形态问题上有区别。就渎职型危害食品安全犯罪而言,食品监管滥用职权罪存在着犯罪的阶段形态,而食品监管玩忽职守罪则不存在犯罪的阶段形态。在非渎职型危害食品安全的共同犯罪中。如果犯罪主体是自然人与单位的共同主体,则主从犯的认定要实行“二次认定法”。而在渎职型危害食品安全犯罪中,食品监管滥用职权罪可发生共犯问题,但食品监管玩忽职守罪的共犯问题尚未得到立法认可。非渎职型危害食品安全犯罪既有竞合犯和牵连犯的罪数形态,也有数罪的罪数形态。至于食品监管渎职罪,其罪数形态问题因其与相关犯罪的关系而引起,而其共犯形态问题也在一定范围内存在着。     

浅析违反我国食品安全法的刑事责任追究

本文简要归纳和分析了违反食品安全法有关刑事责任及刑法的相关罪名,并提出以下建议:扩大生产销售不符合卫生标准的食品罪的犯罪对象,将食品添加剂、食品相关产品安全纳入刑法保护,加强对专供婴幼儿和其他特殊人群食品的刑法保护,增设妨害食品安全罪。     

危害食品安全犯罪中的罪名关系及选择

危害食品安全犯罪活动严重侵害了人民群众的生命健康安全,严重破坏了社会主义市场经济秩序,具有严重的社会危害性。刑法修正案(八)加大了惩处力度,体现了保护民生的立法精神。司法实践中,对于危害食品安全犯罪案件一般以生产、销售不符合安全标准的食品罪,生产、销售有毒、有害食品罪和生产、销售伪劣产品罪定罪处罚,也有少数案件以以危险方法危害公共安全罪、投放危险物质罪、非法经营罪等罪名定罪处罚。对危害食品安全犯罪中的罪名关系及选择进行探讨,有利于依法、正确打击危害食品安全     

刑事禁止令的法理分析

刑事禁止令作为《中华人民共和国刑法修正案(八)》针对被判处管制或宣告缓刑的犯罪分子增设的约束性措施,为禁止该类犯罪人在特定期间实施虽不违反法律法规或管制缓刑相关规定但不利于改造的行为或可能诱发再犯罪的行为提供了必要的依据。其虽属于管制执行和缓刑考验的具体方式,但同时也具有相对独立性,而且《中华人民共和国刑法修正案(八)》对其也只作了原则性规定,在正式实施前尚有必要厘清刑事禁止令的内容、适用条件、法律形式等问题。     

食品监管渎职罪疑难问题司法认定研究——以《刑法修正案(八)》第49条为主线

食品监管渎职罪是《刑法修正案(八)》新增设的罪名,正确理解和界定本罪的构成要件对于准确司法至关重要。其客观方面表现为监管人员玩忽职守、滥用职权致使公共财产、国家和人民利益遭受重大损失,其主体为特殊主体,主观方面包括故意和过失两种罪过形式。《刑法修正案(八)》对食品监管渎职罪的相关规定在适用时和放纵制售伪劣商品犯罪行为罪以及受贿罪等法条易产生竞合,认定的关键在于把握食品监管渎职罪的构成要件和法条竞合的适用原则。刑罚适用方面应将罪名根据故意、过失予以分立。此外,应予增设资格刑和罚金刑。     

论食品监管渎职罪

《刑法修正案(八)》增加规定的刑法第四百零八条之一,对食品监管渎职罪的规定反映了立法机关严惩食品监管渎职犯罪的决心和有力的措施。作为渎职类的犯罪,都规定在刑法第九章渎职罪之中,但食品监督管职罪与其他渎职类犯罪的表现各不相同,因此,有必要对食品监督管职罪的犯罪构成和刑事责任进行分析论证,并将其与其他渎职类犯罪加以比较区分,以便更准确地适用。     

高空抛物罪的法益重释与教义限缩

<正>以刑法修正案（十一）增设高空抛物罪为界,司法实践对于高空抛物刑事案件的处理呈现出两种截然不同的立场。在最高人民法院《关于依法妥善审理高空抛物、坠物案件的意见》（以下简称《高空抛物意见》）出台以后,司法机关对尚未造成严重后果的高空抛物行为基本都以以危险方法危害公共安全罪定罪处罚;而在刑法修正案（十一）之后,高空抛物罪则成为司法机关处罚高空抛物行为的一般性罪名,甚至在高空抛物刑事案件领域再无以危险方法危害公共安全罪和故意伤害罪等重罪的适用空间。这种司法立场的转变至少带来了两个不良后果：一是高空抛物行为刑法处罚的泛化,特别是混淆了高空抛物民事、行政违法与犯罪的界限;     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.     

Monks Who Have Sex: Pārājika Penance in Indian Buddhist Monasticisms

In the study of Buddhism it is commonly accepted that a monk or nun who commits a pārājika offence is permanently and irrevocably expelled from the Buddhist monastic order. This view is based primarily on readings of the Pāli Vinaya. With the exception of the Pāli Vinaya, however, all other extant Buddhist monastic law codes (Dharmaguptaka, Mahāsāṅghika, Mahīśāsaka, Sarvāstivāda and Mūlasarvāstivāda) contain detailed provisions for monks and nuns who commit pārājikas but nevertheless wish to remain within the saṅgha. These monastics are not expelled. Rather, they are granted a special status known as the śikṣādattaka. In this paper I explore the rules. concerning pārājika penance and the śikṣādattaka with specific regard to monastic celibacy. Given that five out of six extant law codes recognise this remarkable accommodation to the rule of celibacy, I argue that we must look to Vinayas other than the Pāli Vinaya if we are to arrive at a nuanced and representative view of Indian Buddhist monasticism.

Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.)

     

Family breakdown and the ‘Welfare Child’ in 19th and 20th century Britain

This article traces new cycles of interest in past children as distinct from past childhood. Recent work highlighting that a conceptualisation of childhood existed even in periods with few written records closes the chapter begun by Philippe Ariès in 1960. Instead, there has been a new surge of interest in children on the edges of family life, as well as children in similarly liminal positions between the worlds of adults and children: runaways, delinquents and orphans. Several themes in the literature are identified, based on the conflicting ideas of ‘body/mind’, ‘victim/threat’, ‘needs/rights’. It is noted that researchers are using more imaginative ways of reaching the lived experience of children than the family or institutional framework, and that an increasing link is drawn between historical and modern concerns such as child abuse and the care of ‘at risk’ children.     

Vedic Language and Vaiṣṇava Theology:Madhva’s Use of Nirukta in his Ṛgbhāṣya

This article explores the way in which Madhva (1238–1317), the founder of the Dvaita Vedānta system of Hindu thought, reformulates the traditional exegetic practice of nirukta or “word derivation” to validate his pluralistic, hierarchical, and Vaiṣṇava reading of the Ṛgvedic hymns. Madhva’s Ṛgbhāṣya (RB) is conspicuous for its heavy reliance on and unique deployment of this exegetical tactic to validate several key features of his distinctive theology. These features include his belief in Viṣṇu’s unique possession of all perfect attributes (guṇaparipūrṇatva) and His related conveyability by all Vedic words (sarvaśabdavācyatva). Such an understanding of Vedic language invokes the basic nirukta presupposition that words are eternally affiliated with the meanings they convey. But it is also based onMadhva’s access to a lexicon entitled Vyāsa’s Nirukti with which his critics and perhaps even his commentators seem to be unfamiliar.While the precise status of this text is the subject of ongoing debate, Madhva’s possession of special insight into the sacred canon is established in part by his unique claim to be an avatāra of the wind god Vāyu and a direct disciple of Viṣṇu Himself in the form of Vyāsa₁. Thus, Madhva’s use of nirukta invokes his personal charisma to challenge not only conventional understandings of the hymns but traditional exegetic norms. Madhva’s provision of an alternative tradition of nirukta provoked sectarian debate throughout the Vijayanagara period over the extent to which one could innovate in established practices of reading the Veda. Articulating the Veda’s precise authority was a key feature of Brahmin debates during this period and reflects both the empire’s concern with promoting a shared religious ideology and the competition among rival Brahman sects for imperial patronage that this concern elicited. By looking at how two of Madhva’s most important commentators (the 14^th-century Jayatīrtha and the 17^th-century Rāghavendra) sought to defend his niruktis, this article will explore how notions of normative nirukta were articulated in response to Madhva’s deviations. At the same time, however, examining Madhva’s commentators’ defense of his niruktis also demonstrates the extent to which Madhva actually adhered to selected exegetic norms. This reveals that discomfort with Madhva’s particular methods for deriving words stemmed, in part, from a more general ambivalence towards this exegetical tactic whose inherent open-endedness threatened to undermine the fixity of the canon’s very substance: its language. Vyāsa’s Nirukti is one of several ”unknown sources” cited in Madhva’s commentaries whose exact status continues to be debated. Some scholars (e.g. Rao, Sharma, Siauve) maintain that these texts are part of a now lost Pāṅcarātra tradition that Madhva is attempting to preserve. This may be true for many of these citations. However, in addition to claiming to be both an avatāra of Vāyu and Viṣṇu-as-Vyāsa’s student, Madhva states in several places (e.g., VTN 42, RB 162) that the canon has suffered loss during transmission and that only Viṣṇu can reveal it in its entirety. Thus, it is possible that Madhva intends texts like Vyāsa’s Nirukti to be viewed as part of an ongoing and corrective revelation, a notion that is compatible with many Vaiṣṇava traditions (Halbfass, 1991: 4).     

Policing Outlawed Desire: ‘Homocriminality’ in Beat Spaces in Australia

Drawing on interview data of gay men who have had their behavior in public spaces scrutinised by agents of the law for signs deviance, this article explores the historical characteristics of police animosity towards such conduct in Australia. This entails examining encounters between police and gay men who pursue desire in ‘beat’ (or ‘cottage’ to the use the UK term) spaces. Exploring why these outlaw gay male subjects are so abject and troubling to the law, the discussion documents how law’s desire to regulate gay men plays out in the masquerade of ‘plain-clothes’ agent provocateur operations where police entrap gay men by mimicking gay bodily appearances, gestures and mannerisms. This article also examines how police regulation of gay desire functions as a form of violence that delimits expressions of same sex desire in public spaces. A key theme that underpins the analyses in this paper is that the policing of desire in ‘beat’ spaces helps produce qualities of illicitness and dangerousness and that this, in turn, fuels the circuit of desire at play between gay men and agents of the law.

Interrupting the Myth of the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Partage</Emphasis>: Reflections on Sovereignty and Sacrifice in the work of Nancy,Agamben and Derrida

Agamben traces the bio-political essence of modern politics to the non-sacrificial killing of Homo Sacer in Roman law. Nancy, on the other hand, links the history of Western politics to the fundamental logic of sacrifice in Western metaphysics. He nevertheless contemplates the possibility that Western societies may finally have arrived at the threshold of a non-sacrificial existence. Derrida seeks to resist the sacrificial logic of Western metaphysics and politics, but nevertheless appears to accept it as an irreducible fact of human co-existence. Unlike Nancy, he envisages no actual or actualised beyond beyond the realm of sacrificial metaphysics and politics. He thus can be said to interrupt Nancy’s ‘myth’ of a non-sacrificial partage. This article compares these three philosophical stances in the hope of throwing more light on the role of sacrifice in the law and politics of our time. Professor of Law, Rand Afrikaans University. Conversations with Ann van Sevenant, Carol Clarkson, Louise du Toit, Peter Fitzpatrick, Costas Douzinas and Adam Thurschwell gave impetus to many of the themes developed in this article. Concomitant shortcomings and inaccuracies, as always, are mine.