帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪若干问题解读

《中华人民共和国刑法》第三百零七条第二款规定了帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪,这一规定具有高度概括性。在司法实践中,在认定帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪问题上存在着一些争议,如要构成帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪是否要求行为人必须出于当事人利益考虑而实施毁灭、伪造证据行为,是否要求行为人必须在当事人参与或知情的情况下实施毁灭、伪造证据行为,隐匿、变造证据行为如何定性等等。本文以一则案例为例对以上问题进行探讨。     

走出“律师伪证”的困惑

新《刑法》实施后,律师从事刑事代理业务会涉及到“毁灭证据罪”、“伪造证据罪”、“妨害证据真实罪”,律师因涉嫌伪证罪而被司法机关拘留、判刑的情形渐有所闻,这就是中国的刑辩律师目前所面对的困境。本文试就这一点进行剖析。立法缺憾:律师成为特殊主体新《刑法》第306条规定“在刑事诉讼中,辩护人、诉讼代理人毁灭、伪造证据,帮助当事人毁灭、伪造证据,威胁、引诱证人违背事实改变证言或者作伪证的,处三年以下有期徒刑或拘役;情节严重的,处三年以上七年以下有期徒刑。辩护人、诉讼代理人提供、出示、引用的证人证言或者其他证据失实,不…     

帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪认定中的疑难问题探析

本罪中的“帮助”行为须以被帮助人的违法犯罪为前提,帮助隐匿、变造证据,只要情节严重也可以构成本罪;当事人教唆他人帮助自己毁灭、伪造证据亦属于事后不可罚行为;他人教唆当事人毁灭、伪造证据成立本罪,但不属于教唆犯,而是间接正犯;对于帮助湮灭罪迹和毁灭罪证的行为不宜再以包庇罪论处;本罪属于情节犯,只有构成与否的问题,不存在犯罪未遂形态。     

帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪的立法疏漏与完善

根据我国现行刑法和司法解释规定,帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪主要表现为唆使、协助当事人毁灭、伪造证据,情节严重的行为。也就是说,行为人在主观上必须有“帮助”的意思表示,并且明知自己的帮助行为有可能因毁灭、伪造证据而影响案件的定性和判刑,以致发生错案,或放纵坏人,或冤枉好人,或使一方当事人无辜受损等。但是,在现实生活中,有许多基本符合该罪特征的行为,却因刑法对该罪的主观方面规定得过于狭窄而无     

诉讼欺诈之刑法规制

诉讼欺诈表现为财产性诉讼欺诈和非财产性诉讼欺诈两大类。财产性欺诈犯罪属诈骗类犯罪,立法应为其单设诉讼诈骗罪,当前可以诈骗罪或其他特殊诈骗罪定罪处罚。非财产性诉讼欺诈属妨害司法类犯罪,立法应扩大现有伪证罪、辩护人、诉讼代理人毁灭、伪造证据罪、帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪适用诉讼领域和犯罪主体范围,合并罪名为伪证罪与毁灭、伪造证据罪。     

《刑法》第306条之思考

《刑法》第 306条规定：“在刑事诉讼中，辩护人、诉讼代理人毁灭、伪造证据，帮助当事人毁灭、伪造证据，威胁、引诱证人违背事实改变证言或者作伪证的，处三年以下有期徒刑或者拘役；情节严重的处三年以上七年以下有期徒刑。”、“辨护人、诉讼代理人提供、出示、引用的证人证言或者其他证据失实，不是有意伪造的，不属于伪造证据。”，该条系此次《刑法》修订新增加的条款。　　1.增设该罪具有现实意义。该罪的客体是司法机关的刑事诉讼活动。主体是辩护人和诉讼代理人，属于特殊主体。辩护人、代理人既可以是律师，也可以是人民团体或者…     

智某某帮助毁灭证据案——如何正确区分帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪和包庇罪

本文通过对一则案例的分析,论述了如何正确区分帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪和包庇罪。     

浅谈反贪侦查中快速突破嫌疑人的方法

在当前复杂的社会环境中，反贪侦查活动中的犯罪嫌疑人对检察机关的调查稍有察觉，就可能毁灭、伪造证据、串供、转移赃款赃物，所以反贪侦查必须善于抓住时机，快反应、快出击、快取证，在最短的时间内把犯罪分子容易隐匿、毁灭的主要证据固定下来，使犯罪分子没有喘息的机会，以快制胜、以快追赃、以快突破关系网。否则反贪侦查工作将会陷入被动。处于重重困难之中。为此，笔者谈谈反侦查中“以快制胜”的有关问题。     

空前的涉“306条”案何时绝后？——此类案件与刑讯逼供案的两大程序问题

近年来,连续几起涉嫌《刑法》第306条“辩护人、诉讼代理人毁灭证据、伪造证据、妨害作证罪”的案件,引起了全国人民的关注,引爆了法律界人士的激烈争议,再度激起306条的存废之争。但是笔者细观各种争论,发现探讨和争论多集中在306条实体问题上。对程序问题没有涉及,下面就程序问题谈谈自己的看法。     

论帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪

帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪是一种侵犯国家司法活动客观公正性的犯罪。虽然事实上多发,但司法实务上却处理较少。原因在于刑法理论及司法实务对本罪的成立条件在很多方面仍有模糊认识。司法实务上认定本罪应重点注意以下几个方面:在一定条件下帮助行为包括帮助共犯人毁灭、伪造证据的情况。当事人的同意在刑事、民事、行政诉讼中具有不同效果。帮助毁灭还包括帮助隐匿的情况,帮助伪造也包括帮助变造的情况。帮助行为具有实行行为性质,行为类型多样。本罪属于危险犯。在共犯关系上,当事人本人不构成本罪的共犯,以及本罪与包庇罪、徇私枉法罪间的竞合关系等。     

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.)

     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

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).     

Student mentoring to enhance graduates’ employability potential

This paper considers whether the adoption of a subject-specific, classroom-based, voluntary extra-curricular student mentoring scheme could provide an effective mechanism and andragogic approach to enhance higher education students’ employability potential pre-graduation.Over the three-year pilot, 26 more advanced (second to fourth year) undergraduate students actively mentored nearly 400 first year undergraduate students during workshops delivered annually within forensic and policing focused courses. In total, 17 mentors anonymously completed online, post-scheme surveys. Survey data was quantitatively analysed to evaluate the scheme, establish which skills and attributes mentors had developed and investigate whether mentors could appropriately identify example skills within professional terminology used during employer recruitment. In addition, this paper reflects on the implementation of remote student mentoring during the COVID-19 pandemic and its adoption within a blended learning framework.The results from this research strongly support mentoring as an effective mechanism to develop undergraduate employability skills, significantly developing mentors’ self-confidence and self-efficacy in their interpersonal and communication skills. Although mentors were aware of university graduate attributes and thought they could evidence these with appropriate examples, in practice this was not necessarily the case. As a result, a framework is proposed to enable mentors to identify their skills and how they may align with competencies sought by relevant forensic and policing employers. However, other andragogic practices may need to be implemented to maximise the potential for successful graduate employment.     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.