Criminal Decision Making: The Development of Adolescent Judgment,Criminal Responsibility,and Culpability

Theories of judgment in decision making hypothesize that throughout adolescence, judgment is impaired because the development of several psychosocial factors that are presumed to influence decision making lags behind the development of the cognitive capacities that are required to make mature decisions. This study uses an innovative video technique to examine the role of several psychosocial factors—temporal perspective, peer influence, and risk perception—in adolescent criminal decision making. Results based on data collected from 56 adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 years revealed that detained youth were more likely to think of future-oriented consequences of engaging in the depicted delinquent act and less likely to anticipate pressure from their friends than nondetained youth. Examination of the developmental functions of the psychosocial factors indicates age-based differences on standardized measures of temporal perspective and resistance to peer influence and on measures of the role of risk perception in criminal decision making. Assessments of criminal responsibility and culpability were predicted by age and ethnicity. Implications for punishment in the juvenile justice system are discussed.     

论刑事法的历史分析

历史分析，作为法学重要的研究方法之一，对于刑事法研究具有积极意义。对中国当代刑事法进行历史分析，并非去发现所谓的“民族精神”，而是寻找刑事法律制度得以形成的脉络，以及在法制演进中的政治、经济和文化因素。在刑事法学研究中运用这种分析方法，具体表现为历史比较研究、历史的社会研究以及历史的价值研究。对中国刑事法发展作历史研究，应区分不同时代，并有目的性地进行研究，进而挖掘其中可为当代刑事法发展利用的有益因素。     

关于刑事和解的几点看法

刑事犯罪多发背景下,被害人利益难以通过传统刑事诉讼程序获得有效救济,甚至存在被害人在刑事诉讼过程中二次受害的情形,从而引发一系列不稳定社会因素,与建设和谐社会的要求背道而驰。刑事和解正是在被害人保护思想的发展与犯罪人复归思想的兴起基础上产生的以恢复性司法为基本理念以构建和谐社会为终极目标的新型刑事案件解决制度。     

论社会管理创新中的刑事法治问题

社会管理创新是当今法学界讨论颇多的一个话题。对于社会管理创新与刑法的关系,要建立在法治的认识前提下,社会管理创新与刑法的基本原则并不冲突,刑法的天然属性使得其与社会管理存在紧密的互动关系,同时,刑法的保障法地位,又决定了社会管理创新需要刑法做坚强的后盾,保障秩序稳定。为了适应社会管理创新的要求,基于两者的契合,刑事法治发展需要从五个方面作出努力:关注社会情势,贯彻宽严相济刑事政策;保障公民权利,重视民生犯罪;"刚柔并济",坚持以人为本;革新纠纷解决机制,灵活、多样化解矛盾;落实行刑社会化,契合多元治理理念。     

刑法关怀与刑法解释

刑法应体现法律之公平善良的特质 ,刑法关怀是指刑法对自然人、社会组织及社会所给予的刑法关注、刑法抵御和刑法保护 ,刑法解释即有权解释 ,是指有权机关依据一定原则使用法定方法对法律文本所作的阐释 ,是连结刑事立法与刑法适用的纽带和中介 ,是折射和反映刑法关怀的最佳视角。欠缺刑法关怀的刑法解释在一定程度上说可能是合法的但未必是合理的。从刑法关怀的维度审视我国现有的刑法解释 ,一方面在于把刑法关怀坚持到底 ,另一方面在于反思刑法解释的真正科学的定位 ,由此建立合法合理的刑法解释体系。     

Deficiencies in the Development of European Criminal Law

Criminal law is beginning to outgrow the shoes which were fitted to it by European law. It is seeking to come of age, to play the role in European law previously reserved to commercial law, private law, employment law, and public law in the broadest sense. Economic knowledge and legal-political organisational interests have long grouped around 'European criminal law'; a still vaguely determined object. A desire also exists to make criminal law justiciable in Europe. Thus, the ranks of the contributions to European criminal law are swelling, European associations of lawyers are developing, legal practitioners are launching appeals3 and winning influence within European institutions. These institutions themselves are beginning to accept and to use criminal law as a political option. This article aims to (I) reflect upon the contents of this development, (II) to clarify their tendencies, and (III) to examine the contents of these premised tendencies, in order to (IV) furnish a critical evaluation.     

Redefining Apartheid in International Criminal Law

This article asks: to what extent is Article 7(1)(j) of the Rome Statute—the crime of apartheid—a tenable crime in international criminal law? It will be argued that despite the obligations incumbent on states not to intentionally discriminate against social groups, there is no customary legal norm of apartheid as a distinct crime against humanity. This is premised on the distinction between state obligations as different from norms demanding individual liability in international criminal law, as well as inadequacies of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973) and the absence of case law relying on apartheid as a crime against humanity. Further, the weaknesses hindering the formation of a customary norm of apartheid as a distinct crime against humanity will be assessed with regard to the Rome Statute. Also it will be shown that the lack of coherence of Article 7(1)(j) demonstrates that the crime of apartheid is subsumed by the crime of persecution. Finally, two suggestions are offered on how the crime of apartheid could be established as a distinct offence in international criminal law. The central thesis of this paper is that the crime of apartheid is ambiguous and inoperable. In order for Article 7(1)(j) to be relevant in international criminal law, the offence must be reworked and clearly articulated.     

刑事被害人国家补偿制度构想

刑事被害人的权利救济是现代人权保护的一个重要问题。当被害人遭受犯罪行为侵害而又难以得到充分赔偿时，为保护被害人权利，彰显社会公平，应当由国家给予一定的物质补偿。目前，一些国家已先后建立了刑事被害人国家补偿制度而我国目前还没有建立。因此笔者建议，在建设社会主义和谐社会的进程中，我们也应立足中国国情，借鉴国外经验，早日建立符合中国国情的刑事被害人国家补偿制度。     

重大公共卫生事件下的刑事政策模式

坚持道德理性而否认规范理性,或者主张规范理性而排斥道德理性,都是有失偏颇的。规范目的与整体法秩序目的是两种不同层次的目的,两者互补互济、相辅相成,能有效衡平社会伦理道德与刑法规范的关系,并使刑法适用保持活性与弹力,充分迎合司法实践需要。信守规范目的而忽视整体法秩序的刑事政策,有时不利于维护社会共同体利益。信奉整体法秩序目的而忽视规范的刑事政策,可能不利于保护共同体成员的个人权益。重大公共卫生事件下,传统刑事政策面临诸多困境,应贯彻刑事政策发展模式。刑事政策发展模式要求正当事由得到现实化延伸,合理调适定罪量刑标准,扩展刑法解释体系范畴。刑事政策发展模式下,需要严控适用范畴,合法约束模糊管理,有效限制道德理性和规制辩证逻辑。     

In Search of the Responsible Subject: History, Philosophy and Social Sciences in Criminal Law Theory

This paper examines the way in which English criminal law's conception of responsibility has changed since the eighteenth century, and explores the relationship between changes in legal framework, changes in processes of criminalisation and punishment, and broader social, political and economic changes. It argues that the development of ideas of individual responsibility for crime are responses to problems of co-ordination and legitimation faced by systems of criminal law, and that these problems can be expected to change according to the environment in which the system operates, with important factors including the distribution of political interests and economic power; the prevailing cultural and intellectual environment; the organisation and status of relevant professional groups and the vigour of alternative means of social ordering. Substantively, the paper explores the hypothesis that criminal responsibility has shifted from a conception founded in ideas of character to a capacity-based conception over the relevant period. Methodologically, the aim is to historicise the structure as well as the content of criminal law within a socio-theoretic framework, constructing a dialogue between criminal law theory of a doctrinal and philosophical temper and socio-historical studies of criminal justice.     

当代中国刑法法典化研究

刑法的法典化是统一刑法典的制定和完善过程。当代中国刑法的法典化程度,与中国社会形势的变迁、法治的整体发展水平、立法技术的提升密切相关。中国刑法的法典化是历史与现实的必然选择,具有重要的法律文化价值、比较法价值、社会价值、现代法治价值和规范价值。中国应综合运用外部和内部策略,制定和发展形式合理、内容全面、科学的统一刑法典。     

Differential Social Support,Differential Coercion,and Organized Criminal Activities

Utilizing differential social support and coercion theory, the study examines how levels of social support and coercion lead to involvement in organized criminal activities through the development of anger, low self-control, low social control, and access to illegitimate social support. The findings show that the association between social support and organized criminal activities is mediated through anger, self-control, social control, and access to illegitimate social support. Similarly, the relationship between coercion and organized criminal activities is mediated through anger, self-control, and illegitimate social support. The results also reveal that coercion has a direct effect on crime. The study offers preliminary theoretical support but more theoretical and empirical work is required to clarify the causal continuum of erraticness and consistency of central variables.     

Theorizing Criminal Law Reform

How are we to understand criminal law reform? The idea seems simple—the criminal law on the books is wrong: it should be changed. But 'wrong’ how? By what norms 'wrong’? As soon as one tries to answer those questions, the issue becomes more complex. One kind of answer is that the criminal law is substantively wrong: that is, we assume valid norms of background political morality, and we argue that doctrinally the criminal law on the books does not embody those norms. Another kind of answer is that the criminal law as it stands presupposes certain empirical facts, and yet those facts do not hold. Traditionally, criminal law reform has been informed by both these answers. Analytical theorists examine doctrine for its conceptual structure, and social scientists examine the actual workings of the criminal justice system. This tidy picture is, however, challenged by social constructivist accounts of the criminal law. They challenge the stability and conceptual purity of doctrine, and they challenge the objectivity of social science. On the basis of these challenges, they undermine the ambitions of traditional criminal law reform, and argue that the only reforms to the criminal law that matter are politicized ones—that criminal law reform is pointless unless it serves the interests of the marginalized and the dispossessed. It seems undeniable that in some sense our perceptions of crime in our society are indeed moulded by social forces, and that crime does not exist independently of the social structures and processes that help to define and control it. But why should those insights have the implications for our understanding of criminal law reform that they are alleged to have? How could it follow from those insights that criminal law reform either becomes radicalized or valueless? The aim of this paper is to show that what can legitimately be taken from the emphasis on the social constructedness of crime does not require wholesale abandonment of the traditional picture of criminal law reform, even though it may require some modifications of that picture.     

和谐社会的刑事法治理性探讨

构建和谐社会需要实质的刑事法治,尤其需要高度重视、重新审视和检讨刑事政策的公正价值与谦抑宽容理性,合理兼顾犯罪防控和人权保障。在理论上,片面强调以报应主义论证刑法公正,把“刑法公正必然内在要求报应主义”这个命题作为一个“不言自明”的公理是存在很大疑问的。在刑事政策意义上的相对公正理性,不但内含了对犯罪规律的基本认识、对犯罪态势的基本判断、对可资利用的现实物质基础和精神文化资源的基本估价、对社会发展的基本考量、对人权尊重的基本态度,还内含了人性假设的基本立场以及在特定历史条件下的价值权衡和价值取向。现代刑事政策内含的谦抑宽容价值理念应当充分体现出最大限度地保障人权、最大限度地促进社会发展、最大限度地体现相对公正、最小限度地维持必要秩序这样一种“三大一小”理念;因此,现代刑事政策理念应当坚持“人权保障至上”、反对“犯罪防控至上”,坚持“公正至上”、反对“效率至上”。     

附属刑法:实现刑法参与国家治理的有效形式

目前我国立法机关存在将有关行政法等部门法律直接引向犯罪的趋势。这不仅导致了附属刑法的弱化,甚至使附属刑法的作用被忽视,还对我国司法实务的操作造成了不便,将本不该由刑法规制的行为错误地划分为犯罪。为了解决这个问题,有学者开始关注我国并不存在的附属刑法。附属刑法本身具有实现维系刑法典稳定、衔接刑法与各部门法、为刑法提供持续性保证的功能。其具有实在内容、又以刑法典为基础和本源,故附属刑法是可以修正刑法典并达到刑法对社会治理作用的有效形式。     

Retribution as Revenge and Retribution as Just Deserts

Public attitudes towards law-breakers shape the tone and tenor of crime-control policy, and the desire for retribution seems to be the main motivation underpinning punitive attitudes towards sentencing. Yet, there is some confusion in the research literature over what retribution really means. In this paper we distinguish between retribution as revenge (as the desire to punish criminal offenders to retaliate a past wrong by making the offender suffer) and retribution as just deserts (as the preference to restore justice through proportional compensation from the offender). Results from an online survey (n = 176) provide evidence of two distinct dimensions of retribution. But we also show that these two dimensions have different ideological and motivational antecedents, and have different consequences in terms of the treatment of criminal offender. We find that retribution as revenge is associated with the motivation to enforce status boundaries with criminal offenders, as well as ideological preferences for power and dominance (as expressed by social dominance orientation) and in-group conformity (as expressed by right-wing authoritarianism). Endorsement of retribution as revenge also predicts the support of harsh punishment and the willingness to deny fair procedures. By contrast, retribution as just deserts is mainly predicted by a value restoration motive and by right-wing authoritarianism. After controlling for revenge, retribution as just deserts predicts support for procedural justice in the criminal courts. We conclude with the idea that beliefs about proportionality and compensation work as a buffer against the negative effects of revenge.     

《大清现行刑律》与民初民事法源——大理院对“现行律民事有效部分”的适用

“现行律民事有效部分”是民初一种主要而又特殊的民事法源，源自《大清现行刑律》，但在立法层面，《大清现行刑律》从“刑律”到“民法”转变的任务并未完成，即未形成统一法律文本样态的“现行律民事有效部分”。司法机关适用该法源时面临着三大难题：无统一明确的内容该如何适用？相关律(例)文未去刑罚化如何用于民事审判？旧的律(例)文如何适应新的社会情势和法律制度？大理院以判例和解释例，确认并明确了“现行律民事有效部分”的内容范围，从原刑律条款转化出民事效果，并通过法律解释、类推适用和假借等方式，保证了其在民初司法实践中的正常适用；经由法律概念的对接、民法理论的融合和权利观念的渗透，实现了对“现行律民事有效部分”的创新，使其成为中国民法近代化历程中新旧之法融合的一个节点和枢纽，构成近代中国法制史上的重要一环。     

刑事政策的价值目标——刑事政策的理性思辨之一

刑事政策决策者总是孜孜不倦地追求刑事政策的价值目标 ,也即刑事政策的终极目标 ,并以此为导向 ,指引刑事政策的进路和可持续发展 ,构建刑事政策体系。刑事政策的价值是刑事政策的客体对于刑事政策主体的意义和效用 ,包括刑事政策价值主体、刑事政策价值客体、刑事政策价值目标三个要素。刑事政策选择实质上是一种价值选择。刑事政策价值目标即自由、秩序、正义、效益 ,以及它们之间的互动关系。     

Imperial Violence: the ‘Ethnic’ as a Component of the ‘Criminal’ Class in Victorian England

This article seeks to identify how, and in what ways, the debate over ethnic identity acquired saliency during the different phases of black settlement in England, especially against the backcloth of the socio-cultural processes and the economics of colonialism. It outlines how the ‘other’ was constituted in different discourses, policies, and practices, and how these constructions were appropriated by the criminal justice agencies. Critically, ethnic identity as subordinate and ‘inferior’ was produced by many of the same mechanisms as was developed with regard to the indigenous ‘criminal’ class in Victorian England. Societal reaction, through criminal and civil statutes, established the identity of the ethnic minorities of early nineteenth century England, not just as subordinate strata, but also by a more complex process, as a variant of the newly emergent ‘criminal’ class. It is argued that, caught in the hub of empire, the ‘ayahs’, the ‘lascars’ and the domestic servants (See R. Visram, The Ayahs, Lascars and The Princes (London: Pluto).) in England’s ports found themselves reconstructed as part of the ‘criminal’ class and subsequently subjected to disciplinary measures of social control and surveillance. The author argues with regard to the indigenous population, conceptions of the threat of the non-Western crystallised around the same popular images of ‘savagery’ and of moral degeneracy, a process reinforced in imperial fiction. A desire to ‘civilise’ and improve the peculiar habits of the non-Western followed directly from indigenous precedent.     

刑事违法性的源流及相关范畴

刑事违法性作为一种规范评价,本质是法益侵害,社会危害性的内容应解读为法益侵害。我国旧刑法在规定类推制度的前提下,犯罪模式是以社会危害性为主,以刑事违法性为辅的;新刑法确定罪刑法定原则后,社会危害性以"但书"规定,在司法范围内具体的、个别的判断中发挥着出罪的作用,犯罪模式演变为刑事违法性为主,社会危害性为辅。危害性判断是罪刑法定原则的补充,与刑事违法性并无冲突。以此二元模式为基础,构建我国刑法中以肯定入罪要件和否定出罪要件为要素的双层递进的犯罪论体系。