| 尹晓闻.禁止或限制从事职业与资格刑的构建[J].井冈山大学社科版,2016,(2):84-91 |
| 禁止或限制从事职业与资格刑的构建 |
| On the Construction of Occupation Practice Prohibition or Restriction Penalty |
| 投稿时间：2015-11-15 |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1674-8107.2016.02.014 |
| 中文关键词: 职业 非刑罚处置措施 刑事责任 资格刑 |
| 英文关键词: occupation non-criminal penalty criminal responsibility qualification-based criminal penalty |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2100 |
| 全文下载次数: 2474 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 长期以来, 对利用职业便利或违背职业要求的特定义务实施犯罪的刑事责任的追究, 只囿于传统的刑罚方式, 而对有关职业或资格的禁止只能由行政机关来作出。《刑法修正案(九)草案》赋予了法院可以禁止犯罪行为人一定期限从事职业的自由裁量权, 从而扩展了刑事责任的内容。但由于禁止或限制从事职业作为非刑罚处置措施, 缺乏职业确定的刑法性标准, 而且禁止或限制从事职业的非刑罚措施附加于刑罚适用容易产生“处罚过剩”的现象。对禁止或限制从事职业的处罚权分设为司法裁判权和行政处罚权, 不仅不利于刑事司法权的独立适用, 而且有悖于实现刑事责任追究的公平原则。因此, 应当将禁止或限制从事职业的非刑罚处置措施升格为资格刑。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| For a long time in China, prosecution of the criminal responsibility for the crime by utilizing occupation convenience or violating the certain duties required by occupation features are executed through application of traditional penalty forms, while the prohibition of the occupation or qualification are issued by administrative authorities. The No. 9 Amendment of the Criminal Law conferred the People's Court right of discretion to prohibit criminal person from practice in certain occupation for a certain period, thus expanding the content of criminal responsibility. However, prohibition as a non-criminal penalty lacks occupation-defining standards in criminal law, and the non-criminal penalty affiliated to criminal penalty tend to result to "over penalty". Division of the right of prohibition penalty into judiciary and administrative ones is not only disadvantage to the independent application of criminal judiciary right, but also contradictory to the principle of equality in criminal responsibility prosecution. Thus, it is necessary to upgrade the non-criminal penalty of prohibition to qualification-based criminal penalty. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
