浅析“使用以虚假的身份证明骗领的信用卡”的行为

信用卡诈骗罪的犯罪行为具体表现为：使用伪造的信用卡或者使用以虚假的身份证明骗领的信用卡购买商品、在银行或自动取款机上支取现金以及接受服务等：使用因法定原因而失去效用的信用卡：行为人非法以持卡人的名义使用信用卡骗取钱财或服务：持卡人以非法占有为目的，超过规定限额或者规定期限透支，并且经发卡银行催收后仍不归还。上述行为中“使用以虚假的身份证明骗领的信用卡”是《刑法修正案（五）》新增加的一种行为方式。     

信用卡诈骗罪若干疑难问题研究

将借记卡归入"信用卡"的含义之中,符合刑法信用卡诈骗罪的立法初衷.对拾得信用卡并加以使用行为以信用卡诈骗罪定性,符合刑法原理.对以抢劫等犯罪手段获取他人信用卡并加以使用行为应以重罪吸收轻罪的原则具体定罪处罚.对伪造信用卡并加以使用的行为应以伪造金融票证罪定性.对行为人使用虚假的身份证明骗领信用卡后又加以使用的行为应以信用卡诈骗罪定性.对行为人使用虚假身份证明骗领信用卡后没有使用的行为应以妨碍信用卡管理罪定性.     

涉信用卡犯罪对象的评析及认定简

我国刑法规定的信用卡形式主要有：伪造的信用卡、作废的信用卡、以虚假的身份证明骗领的信用卡、他人信用卡、空白信用卡、伪造的空白信用卡与信用卡信息资料等。伪造信用卡犯罪的对象应当包含空白的信用卡。窃取、收买、非法提供他人信用卡信息罪的对象包含了印制在信用卡表面的持卡人姓名、信用卡号码等信息资料;在理解与适用刑法其他涉信用卡犯罪规定时,应当将信用卡信息资料与实体形式的信用卡、公民个人信息相区别。在信用卡诈骗罪中,根据卡与使用主体真实性与虚假性的介入程度,“假卡假人”、“真卡假人”以及“真卡真人”这三种排列组合所对应行为的危害性（即骗的程度）是逐渐降低的,但对行为方式的认定则应依据由高至低的规则;认定行为人所使用的信用卡是否为骗领的信用卡,应当以金融机构是否基于虚假证明材料而产生认识错误为标准;“盗窃信用卡并使用”中的“信用卡”仅包含真实有效的信用卡,而不包括伪造的信用卡、已经作废的信用卡,甚或以虚假的身份证明骗领的信用卡等。     

涉信用卡犯罪对象的评析及认定

我国刑法规定的信用卡形式主要有:伪造的信用卡、作废的信用卡、以虚假的身份证明骗领的信用卡、他人信用卡、空白信用卡、伪造的空白信用卡与信用卡信息资料等。伪造信用卡犯罪的对象应当包含空白的信用卡。窃取、收买、非法提供他人信用卡信息罪的对象包含了印制在信用卡表面的持卡人姓名、信用卡号码等信息资料;在理解与适用刑法其他涉信用卡犯罪规定时,应当将信用卡信息资料与实体形式的信用卡、公民个人信息相区别。在信用卡诈骗罪中,根据卡与使用主体真实性与虚假性的介入程度,"假卡假人"、"真卡假人"以及"真卡真人"这三种排列组合所对应行为的危害性(即骗的程度)是逐渐降低的,但对行为方式的认定则应依据由高至低的规则;认定行为人所使用的信用卡是否为骗领的信用卡,应当以金融机构是否基于虚假证明材料而产生认识错误为标准;"盗窃信用卡并使用"中的"信用卡"仅包含真实有效的信用卡,而不包括伪造的信用卡、已经作废的信用卡,甚或以虚假的身份证明骗领的信用卡等。     

妨害信用卡管理罪若干问题研究

妨害信用卡管理罪自设立以来,围绕其犯罪构成以及与其他信用卡犯罪的区分一直存在较多争议,实践中也遇到不少法律适用方面的疑难问题。伪造的信用卡不仅仅是指外观上的伪造,更侧重指信用卡信息的伪造。不应把仅仅提供虚假资信等身份证明以外资料的行为,也认定为妨害信用卡管理的行为。为避免司法实践中的争议和混乱,应在刑法中增加单位为妨害信用卡管理罪的主体为宜,对单位实施的犯罪行为仅仅追究直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员,而不追究单位本身的责任,不符合罪责自负原则。出售,购买,为他人提供诈骗、捡拾的信用卡是否构成犯罪,法律并未规定,但从法益保护角度分析这些行为造成的社会危害性并不亚于出售、购买、为他人提供伪造的信用卡或以虚假身份证明骗领的信用卡,理应加以惩处。行为人"以虚假身份证明骗领的信用卡"由于持卡人是不真实的,对这种骗领的信用卡加以使用,遭受财产损失的是银行,危害的是金融秩序和银行资金安全,应当以信用卡诈骗罪定罪处罚,而不应以盗窃罪论处。     

论我国“恶意透支”型信用卡诈骗罪的主体

本文案例启示：恶意透支型信用卡诈骗罪中的＂持卡人＂不仅包括合法持卡人,也应当包括使用虚假财产状况骗领信用卡的持卡人,对使用虚假身份型骗领信用卡的持卡人要排除在外。在＂借卡人＂透支消费,超过规定限额或期限时,应当区别不同的情形具体分析,尤其是在＂借卡人＂为＂持卡人＂的配偶时,该透支行为不同于一般＂借卡人＂的透支,要单独分析。     

信用卡诈骗罪若干问题研究

信用卡诈骗罪是以信用卡作为犯罪工具的诈骗犯罪。建议该罪亦可由单位构成犯罪主体 ;骗领信用卡人不能成为恶意透支的犯罪主体 ;对使用伪造、作废信用卡、冒用他人信用卡 ,恶意透支行为 ,应区别不同情况分别处理 ;危害信用卡并使用的行为 ,拾得信用卡并使用的行为构成本罪 ;对骗领信用卡并使用的行为、信用卡协议透支的行为 ,应区别不同情形 ,作出相应处罚。     

信用卡持有人诈骗行为实证分析

司法实践中,常常出现信用卡合法持卡人与实际持卡人分离的现象,加剧了对信用卡诈骗罪理解适用方面的难度。对于信用卡诈骗罪中的虚假身份证明应当作限缩解释,将工作证、资信证明等排除在外。对于冒用行为,法规明确合法持卡人无权出借信用卡给他人使用,但合法持卡人出借信用卡的会阻却冒用行为的犯罪构成。对于恶意透支,则要分析持卡人有无非法占有的目的,部分还款行为不影响非法目的的成立。     

金融诈骗罪中的主观内容分析

“以非法占有为目的”并非是所有金融诈骗罪主观方面的必备条件 ,而应取决于刑法的具体规定 ,对金融犯罪的犯罪对象的不明知包括不认识和可能认识两种情形。司法推定理论有助于金融犯罪的认定和查处 ,但也不能不加区分地盲目适用。最后 ,本文提出了修改金融诈骗罪罪名、对虚假陈述型欺诈行为和骗取财物型诈骗行为分别规定法定刑及增加信用卡诈骗罪和有价证券诈骗罪中犯罪对象“明知”要求的立法建议。     

信用卡诈骗罪若干法律问题

随着我国金融制度的发展,生活中出现了许多新型的金融支付工具。信用卡已成为犯罪分子的重点攻击目标,极大地损害了信用卡的信用度,也严重地破坏了金融秩序。本文通过对信用卡诈骗罪在法律实践中几个疑难问题的探讨,如:借记卡诈骗行为的定性问题、单位能否成为犯罪主体、盗窃信用卡并使用的问题、骗领信用卡并使用的等,提出对信用卡诈骗罪几点看法。     

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.