摘要
立法者之所以规定抽象危险型犯罪,乃是为了填补处罚力图和过失过程中出现的漏洞,以及为了解决刑事证明上遇到的困难。一方面,人们不宜笼统地否定抽象危险型犯罪,另一方面,立法者也不可以无限制地进行抽象危险型犯罪的立法。在制定抽象危险型犯罪的构成要件时,应当在遵守罪刑法定中的明确性原则的同时,考虑规定“积极的悔过”并避免规定累积型犯罪。在规定了客观处罚条件的抽象危险型犯罪上,可以要求作案人至少预见到客观处罚条件的出现;在具体个案中出现无危险的行为时,可以在必要的场合针对构成要件进行目的性的限缩,从而保证不违背罪责原则。
The reason why the lawmakers specified the crimes of abstract endangerment is to fill the loopholes caused by the punishment of attempt and negligence, and to solve the difficulties encountered in criminal proof. On the one hand, it is not suitable for people to deny crimes of abstract endangerment totally, on the other hand, lawmakers can not carry out legislation on crimes of abstract endangerment without restriction. In the development of the constitutive elements of crimes of abstract endangerment, it is necessary to take into account the specified “positive regrets”and avoid the regulation of the accumulated crime, while observing the clear principle of the crime and punishment. As to the crimes of abstract endangerment with the provision of object condition of punishment, it is reasonable to require that the perpetrator has foreseen that object condition. As to those concrete cases in which no dangerous actions appear, it is proper to restrict the scope of application of the related provisions purposively, in order to ensure the abidance of the principle of culpability.
出处
《法治社会》
2019年第4期110-118,共9页
Law-Based Society
关键词
抽象危险型犯罪
立法缘由
罪刑法定
目的性限缩
罪责原则
Crimes of Abstract Endangerment
Reasons for Legislation
Principle of Legality
Teleological Restriction
Principle of Culpability
作者简介
[德]约尔格·艾泽勒(Prof. Dr. Joerg Eisele),德国图宾根大学刑法学教授;蔡桂生,中国人民大学刑事法律研究中心讲师,德国波恩大学法学博士。
