刑事诉讼中积极赔偿对量刑的影响及其合理控制研究

刑事诉讼中的民事赔偿是一个制度集合概念,并与量刑密切相关。以5072份故意伤害罪判决为样本进行量化分析发现,通过和解、刑事附带民事诉讼判决结案等不同途径实现的民事赔偿对量刑的影响力存在明显差别。其原因在于被害人满意程度是量刑阶梯设计的重要标准,而恢复正义为被害人满意作为量刑标准提供了正义基础。司法实践中应对刑事诉讼中积极赔偿对量刑的影响进行合理控制,降低不同类型民事赔偿对量刑影响的差异,推动"同案同判"的量刑公正。     

商事信用的界定与制度构成

不同领域、不同学科的信用概念有着不同的涵义。商法上的商事信用不只是一种对商事主体履约或清偿能力的主观评价，同时也是一种客观的履约能力。我国需要创建的商事信用制度具有丰富的内容和特定的规范构成，包括商事信用权、商事信用信息公示、商事信用信息征集和商事信用的评价以及商事信用的守信激励与失信惩戒等多项制度。大陆法国家传统商法制度中没有单独的商事信用制度，并不成为否定商事信用制度的充分理由，相反恰是创新中国商事信用制度的重要根据。设计并构建商事信用制度无疑是中国未来商事立法的必由之路和重大使命。     

Editor’s Note

Envisioning a well-ordered society composed of filial subjects who obeyed the law, avoided disputes, shunned religious heresy, paid their taxes, and peacefully engaged in agriculture, the Kangxi emperor’s “Sacred Edict of Sixteen Maxims” (圣谕十六条) has often been considered a declaration of the alien Qing dynasty’s Confucian bona fides. While the rhetoric of the pronouncement echoed traditional moral values, the political acumen of the Qing rulers was readily apparent in the eighth maxim, “explain the laws to warn the ignorant and obstinate.” Melding moral and legal education, the eighth maxim specifically endorsed the efficacy of the law. The importance placed on legal knowledge was abundantly clear in one of the earliest commentaries, which explained all sixteen maxims with examples of applicable legal guidelines. Thus, the “Sacred Edict” was a shrewd maneuver that endorsed traditional moral values, but it also foreshadowed a “legislative turn” in the Qing rule that was discernible in the evolving ethos of criminal justice. Despite the extensive efforts to propagate the “Sacred Edict,” violent crime was on the rise in the Kangxi, Yongzheng, and Qianlong reigns. When transformation through moral “teaching and cultivation” (jiaoyang 教养) failed to alleviate social conflict, Qing rulers reconsidered and revised the established practice of criminal justice and the existing concept of criminal behavior. By the end of the eighteenth century, the effort to stem the tide of violent crime relied less on ideological exhortation and more on legislation that articulated harsh punishments. This “legislative turn” in Qing criminal justice resulted in an aggressive policy of deterrence that facilitated the greater use of capital punishment.     

The Hurried Justification of Sanctions

In this paper I try to see how the Derridean aporias of the law of the urgency of legal decisions (the law interrupts the input of knowledge in the decision-making process) and the épokhè of the rule (justice can never be done in the present) are revealed in the context of the justification of sanctions. I argue that sanctions can only be justified in a purposive manner in the last instance. They can only be means to an end of punishment which has been opted for, and which can be justified on grounds of principles, or an authoritative calculation of incommensurable entities. I argue against theories, which advocate the internal connection of law and morality, because if such a connection could be established, the aporia of the hurried and unjustified action would obviously disappear. In particular my target is discourse theory as formulated mainly by Robert Alexy with his Sonderfallthese(Special Case Thesis). My objection is that, because of their instrumental nature, sanctions cannot be justified on moral grounds. I also consider some objections that could be raised from Klaus Günther's theory of appropriateness and Habermas' distinction between the moral, ethical and pragmatic employments of practical reason. I am argue that the former, which would become relevant at the stage of application, that is sentencing, does not resolve the justificatory problem of sanctions, and the latter confirms rather than falsifies my claim that punishment can never be said to be just.     

Censure Theory and Intuitions about Punishment

Many philosophers and laypeople have the following twointuitions about legal punishment: the state has a protanto moral reason to punish all those guilty ofbreaking a just law and to do so in proportion totheir guilt. Accepting that there can be overridingconsiderations not to punish all the guilty inproportion to their guilt, many philosophers stillconsider it a strike against any theory if it does notimply that there is always a supportive moral reasonto do so. In this paper, I demonstrate that censuretheory accounts for these intuitions much better thanany other theory, including forms of retributivismsuch as desert theory and fairness theory, and explainwhy censure theory is able to do so.     

对“刑罚的执行”法律定位的学理思考——兼论我国监狱法典的完善

在我国监狱法中 ,刑罚的执行被定位在与狱政管理、教育改造等并列的层次上。本文认为 ,这一定位是报应刑罚思想和新中国行刑领域中的“三位一体”观念的产物 ,很难自圆其说。无论从历史看 ,还是从逻辑看 ,刑罚的执行是狱政管理、教育改造等的上位概念 ,因此 ,监狱法应对刑罚的执行重新定位     

保安处分若干理论问题探析

世界各国的刑法发展大都经历了一个由严酷到轻缓、由纯粹报应到兼顾教化的过程。本文就保安处分的若干理论问题作了较为粗浅的探讨并对我国保安处分刑事立法提出建议。希望能对保安处分制度的建立有所裨益。     

限制加重原则的公正性研究

大陆法系国家在对有期自由刑进行并罚时,大多采用限制加重原则。但在一般民众看来,有期自由刑并罚采用限制加重原则,只不过是一种权宜的做法,认为它是对法律打折扣,不具有公正性。限制加重理念不仅存在于数罪并罚中,它同样存在于个罪的刑罚分配之中,在有期自由刑并罚时,限制加重不过表现得更直观罢了。     

试论我国资格刑的缺陷与完善

资格刑是以剥夺犯罪人的某种资格的刑罚.通过剥夺行为人实施某种行为的资格和能力,彰显其实现刑罚特殊预防目的的独特功能.因而资格刑的存在是必要的.就我国现状而言,现行资格刑种类单一、针对性不强、设计不甚合理.不仅如此,大量具有资格剥夺性质的处罚游离于刑罚体系之外,发挥资格刑的作用.因此,我国资格刑亟需完善:一方面,针对资格刑种类单一,应将散见其他法律条文中具有剥夺资格的内容进行整合纳入刑罚体系,同时,对现行的资格刑进行分解,以完善我国资格刑种类;另一方面,针对资格刑适用方面的弊端,应增加资格刑的复权制度以完善资格刑的执行制度.     

社区矫正工作的意义及作用

社区矫正是一种专门机关和社会力量相结合的刑罚执行方式,在国外的刑事司法实践中,已经被广泛应用。但它在中国的刑事司法实践中似乎还是一个新名词。从一般的意义上说,社区矫正是国家司法制度中的一部分。社区矫正理论认为:对犯罪人的刑事责任的考虑不应仅仅基于犯罪人本身的行为,而应考虑社会应承担的责任,而社区矫正正是凸现了社会责任方面,并打开了犯罪人回归社会的通道。