【作者】 熊瑛；

【导师】 朱建华；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 刑法学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 立功有广义、狭义之分，狭义的立功是一种量刑情节，在此意义上，立功制度是我国刑法对具有立功表现的犯罪人予以从宽处理的一项刑罚裁量制度。立功制度对于感召犯罪分子悔过自新，分化、瓦解犯罪联盟，节约司法资源，预防犯罪具有重要意义。但是，应当看到，理论界对该制度未予以足够关注，大多局限于具体的实践层面，欠缺自觉、深入研究，而且一部分学者质疑该制度存在的必要性。研究的薄弱极大地困扰了司法认定，不利于立功制度的健康发展。为了更好地发挥立功制度的功用，将理论与实践相结合，对其作系统、深入研究是必要的。本文以我国刑法理论为指导，以立法规定和司法解释为基础，认为立功制度蕴含着公正和功利价值，并且具有哲学、道义、政策等坚实根基，在肯定立功制度的前提下，对立功的成立条件，认定及法律后果等问题进行了较为细致地分析，以期实现立法初衷，全文19余万字，共分四章。第一章为“立功制度概论”。本章简述立功制度在中外刑法史上的发展状况并探讨了立功的概念、根基及价值等四个问题。在中国刑法史上，立功制度的沿革可分为古代、近代及新中国成立之后三个阶段。立功制度源远流长，最早可追溯到秦《封诊式》，在漫长的古代岁月中，立功始终与自首相伴而行。及至近代，监狱法制中出现对犯人善行予以奖励之规定，革命法制中的立功与政治斗争的需要相适应。在总结过去经验的基础上，新中国成立之后，79刑法颁布之前的单行刑法、政府法令肯定并鼓励犯罪分子立功赎罪，79刑法中的立功附属于自首。97刑法中立功终于脱离了自首而成为独立的刑罚裁量制度。在当代外国刑法中，有的将其纳入“犯罪分子的罪后态度及行为”而作为酌定量刑情节，有的能够将立功与其他情节混杂规定，但分则中不乏对犯有部分罪行的罪犯立功从宽的规定。由此可知，国外立法规定并不是相形见绌，而是更注重发挥立功在打击恐怖犯罪、毒品犯罪、危害国家安全等严重犯罪方面的作用。域外的污点证人作证豁免制度与我国的立功制度在打击犯罪，促使罪犯与司法机关合作等方面有相似之处，但二者在理论基础、制度设计等方面存在根本区别，不能混为一谈，在适当的时候我国可以考虑建立污点证人作证豁免制度。立功是一种能为不同领域中人们所实施的重要行为。立功的概念是建立在对立功本质的正确认识上，学界对“立功的本质”的提法多样，有“立功的本质属性”、“立功制度的本质”、“立功的本质特征”等表述方式，只有“立功的本质”的提法才是可取的，立功的本质是有益于国家和社会，能增进社会福利的行为。立功不同于立功制度，概念的设定不需遵循法定原则。鉴此，作为量刑情节的立功是犯罪分子犯罪后判决或裁定生效前作出的有利于国家和社会并达到突出程度的行为。道义、理论、哲学、实践、政策是支撑着立功制度的五大根基，“善有善报，恶有恶报”的道义根据为其抹上了厚重、鲜明的正义色彩。辩证唯物主义关于物质是运动的及内外因辩证关系原理是其哲学基石。同时，立功契合了“为最大多数人谋取最大幸福”的功利主义学说，“立功折罪，立大功受奖”的政策及我国运用立功同犯罪作斗争的具体经验及实际情况为立功制度的发展及壮大提供了丰富的养分。功利和公正是立功制度蕴含的两种不同价值，从应然的角度看，二者是统一的，但从实然的角度看，二者存在矛盾和冲突。二者的协调应当以公正为基础，以功利为目标，在保证公正的基础上追求最大化的功利。为了功利抛弃公正不可取，为了公正抛弃功利也不恰当。因其具有功利和公正价值，立法不能废除立功制度；对以非法手段获取他人犯罪线索的行为不能认定为立功，因为这种行为严重背离了公正价值。第二章为“立功的认定”。本章主要涉及的是立功的成立条件、立功表现的认定及重大立功、帮助立功、特殊人员的立功、立功的认定主体等疑难问题的认识。立功的成立条件是某一行为被认定为立功所必须具备的条件或规格。各家对立功应具备哪些成立条件见解各异，主要有二要件、三要件、四要件与五要件说。各要件的称谓应力求准确以避免歧义和逻辑错误，主观要件及查证要件均非成立要件。立功之成立条件应为主体、时间、行为及有效性四要件。主体要件是犯罪嫌疑人、被告人，时间跨度为犯罪后至判决、裁定生效之前。行为要件是法律及司法解释规定的五种立功表现，有效性要件是立功的内容应当真实且具有客观效果。在共同犯罪、对合犯、连累犯等场合，犯罪人对自己所犯罪行的供述可能涉及同案犯的罪行，同案犯是否是“他人”？同案犯有广、狭义之分，笔者认为从字面上理解“同案犯”的含义即可，是指在同一案件中被审理的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人，其外延比共同犯罪人广。广义的同案犯存在于共同犯罪、对合犯及连累犯之中。共同犯罪人检举共同犯罪人所犯的共同犯罪事实，构成自首或坦白，不存在立功的余地。由于对合犯并非都是共同犯罪，所以在认定对合犯一方提供另一方的犯罪行为是否是立功，不能完全照搬前述共同犯罪人立功原则。无论是双方同罪、双方异罪还是一方有罪均需考察其供述是否超过自己所犯罪行的范畴。如果是则是揭发“他人”犯罪，反之则不是。本犯揭发连累犯的应属揭发“他人”犯罪，在连累犯揭发本犯的情况下，由于明知是连累犯主观要件的内容，连累犯交待自己罪行时牵涉出本犯罪行的，不属揭发“他人”犯罪。此处的犯罪行为是符合犯罪客观特征、旁人能感知的某个特定犯罪客观方面的表现。检举未达到刑事责任年龄或心神丧失的人实施的具有严重社会危害性的行为，揭发已超过追诉时效期限、经特赦令免除刑罚、被告人死亡及告诉才处理的犯罪，属揭发他人“犯罪”。常见的协助抓捕行为有当场指认、实际带捉、提供线索和按要求联络等，协助抓捕的对象是其他犯罪嫌疑人，应视具体具体决定其他犯罪嫌疑人是否包括同案犯。对于提供侦破其他案件的重要线索的立功表现应注意；线索不同于证据，线索必须清晰，线索是侦破其他案件的重要线索，线索应查证属实等问题。阻止他人犯罪的方式是用积极的行动去制止，阻止的对象是他人，阻止的必须是正在进行的犯罪。“其他有利于国家和社会的突出表现”不必限于协助司法机关侦破案件。犯罪分子规劝他人自首属此种立功表现，但是犯罪后的巨额捐赠不能认定为立功。刑罚、社会影响和重大贡献是认定重大立功的三重标准。刑罚标准是可能被判处无期徒刑以上的刑罚，当被检举人案件先行判决时，应以被检举人实际处刑为标准来判定检举人是否是重大立功。社会影响标准具有存在的必要性，具体内容可借鉴四川省贪污贿赂犯罪、渎职犯罪、经济犯罪大要案的认定。重大贡献主要指与犯罪无关的表现，如有发明创造、重大技术革新等。帮助立功只存在于帮助司法机关侦破其他案件的活动中。非在押的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人与其亲友、辩护律师的接触未违反监管规定，后者将知悉的犯罪线索告诉前者是可以的，只要其亲友、律师不是采取不正当手段获得立功信息即可。辩护人不能利用同犯罪嫌疑人、被告人会见、通信的机会传递法律禁止传递的信息以帮助他们逃避惩罚。负有查办犯罪职责的国家工作人员不得将利用职务之便获取的他人犯罪线索提供给犯罪分子。犯罪分子从同监在押人员处获悉的他人犯罪事实，只要不是通过非法手段获取的，经查证属实的，应当认定犯罪分子具有立功表现。诱惑者配合的是提供机会型引诱而非犯意引诱时，才能对其协助抓获或检举揭发行为认定为立功。负有查禁犯罪职责的国家工作人员据以立功的线索是其依查禁犯罪的职务之便获取的，不能认定为立功。对查证属实的把握，应注意：查证的主体是侦查机关；应规定一较长的查证时间；对于可能判处死刑的案件，无论被告人可能构成重大立功还是一般立功，均应等到查实后再行判决。对于判决后才查证属实的案件，如果被告人构成一般立功，则通过减刑来体现政策，如构成重大立功，则予以改判。被检举揭发的犯罪事实清楚，证据确实充分、依法构成犯罪的，可以认为是属实而不以被检举行为是否最终被起诉、定罪为准。查证的事项为行为是否属五种立功表现之一，立功线索来源为必查事项。查证后应反馈查证结果并按要求提供证明材料。立功的认定权由法院享有，当检察机关作出酌定不起诉而终止诉讼程序时，立功的认定权由检察机关享有。第三章为“立功的法律适用”，主要探讨了立功从宽处罚的根据及对从宽处理的理解和适用的问题。立功从宽处罚的主要根据是人身危险性的减少，次要根据是基于对国家、社会所作贡献的回报。立功属法定情节，立功情节酌定化的观点因思考问题方式的简单化、无助于问题的解决、对被告人的吸引力小、是立法的倒退等原因而不可取。立功属可以型情节，以下几种情形不予以从宽：犯罪之前预谋立功；犯罪动机十分卑劣，手段极为残忍，危害后果特别严重，社会影响特别恶劣；虽有立功，但态度恶劣，毫无悔罪之意；立功后又犯罪的；共同犯罪的首要分子、主犯从宽后，全案处刑明显失衡的。对立功的犯罪分子确定从宽幅度时应考察：罪行轻重、立功的动机、立功表现所起的协助作用大小、立功的时间及次数、从宽处罚的顺序等。当立功与其他从轻情节竞合时，应加大对被告人从轻处罚的幅度，数个从轻情节不能升格为一个减轻情节。若被告人因重大立功可减轻处罚时，同时又有其他从轻情节，不能以减轻吸收从轻情节。若被告人因立功而被免除处罚，如果还具有其他从轻情节，则直接免除处罚。数个减轻情节的竞合只能逼近，而不能成为免除处罚。在立功与从重情节并存时，立功与从重情节均应发挥对量刑的影响力，根据案件的具体情况决定是是否应对犯罪分子从宽处罚。在决定从宽处罚的基础上，应定量分析案件的量刑情节以决定宣告刑。第四章集中探讨立功制度的完善。立功制度的完善应从立法和司法两个层面入手，针对立法完善，应增加规定自首又有一般立功表现的可以从轻或减轻处罚；建议法条对自首且重大立功的法律后果的规定改为“可以减轻或免除处罚”。建议在总则第五章“其它规定”中单设一条明确立功表现，并删去第七十八条中的相关规定以保持刑法的协调性。针对司法解释的完善，立功的开始时间应是犯罪后；关于重大立功的认定，案件已经判决的，除因被判刑人在立功行为实施后形成的新的量刑情节依法从轻、减轻处罚后判处有期徒刑之外，应当以实际判处的刑罚为准。应进一步细化“其他有利于国家和社会的突出表现”，该表现至少应包括以下几种情形：协助司法机关查获其他犯罪案件中的重要的赃物；在突发事件或自然灾害中奋不顾身地避免了重大损失；有重大发明创造等。为进一步规范立功的查证和认定工作，有必要设立立功告知和登记程序；设立立功查证机关的领导机构；补充“查证属实”的内容。如细化查证属实的标准，被检举的犯罪行为在侦查阶段时，以侦查机关出具对所检举之罪已查实的证据材料为查证属实；在审查起诉阶段时，以起诉意见书为查证属实；在法院审理阶段尚未宣判的以起诉书，已经宣判的以有罪判决书视为查证属实。更多还原

【Abstract】 There are two broad and narrow senses about meritorious service.Meritorious service, innarrow meaning, a circumstance for discretion of punishment, is a special system ofmeasurement of punishment applied to those criminals who have performed meritoriousservice Although it is important in inspiring offenders to repent, breaking up criminal alliance,retrenching judicial resources and preventing crimes, this system hasn’t received enoughattention from academic circles. Now academic research is mainly confined to practical level,some researchers even have questioned this system’s existing value. The weak researchsituation has greatly puzzled its application and healthy development. It is necessary to makepractical and theoretical study on Rendering Meritorious service so as to bring its role intofull play. Under the guidance of the theories of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic ofChina.this dissertation holds that this system embodies binary value of utilitarianism andJustice, and has solid moral, philosophy, theory, policy and practice foundations. On the basisof affirming the function of this system, the paper analyses problems such as constitution,identification and penal application which belong to knotty problems in detail to realizeoriginal intention of legislature better, which includes the following chapters.The first chapter presents an introduction to Meritorious performance, mainly concerningabout four sections such as a brief historical development in the domestic and foreign criminallaw history, conception,foundation and value.The evolution of meritorious service can bedivided into three stages: the ancient era, the Republic of China era, the socialist era of newChina. The Meritorious service can be traced back to Fengzhenshi in Qing Dynasty and isalways goes with system of surrendering oneself to judicial organ in the ling ancient times.Inthe course of modern times stipulations that prisoners with actions out of goodwill should beawarded can be found in Prison legal system. The Meritorious services in democraticrevolution era met the demands of the political struggles at that time. After the People’sRepublic of China was established, single criminal codes、governmental orders and judicialinterpretations enacted before the first criminal code was laid down made it a rule thatcriminals be encouraged to perform meritorious services to atone for their crimes. CriminalCode enacted in1997changes the meritorious services from dependant position toindependent one.However, there is a different position in foreign countries’ counterpart,which is either brought into the range of “the act and attitude after the criminal action of the offender” or is mixed with other circumstances. Yet there are also many similar provisionsapplied to criminals conducting serious crimes. So the related provisions in foreign countries’criminal law are not outshone but maybe conducive to unfolding the system’s function incombating serious crimes such as drug, terrorism crimes. The meritorious performance,whichis not particular to criminal law,is an important behavior carried out by person in all walkslife.The concept of the meritorious performance is based on the correction understanding ofits essence, which is a kind of behavior beneficial to the country and society and promotessocial warfare.So the meritorious performance in the criminal law is one performed by thecriminal to do good to the country and society. Although system of immunity of taintedwitness practiced in many foreign countries is similar to meritorious performance inpreventing crimes and helping to bring about cooperation between criminals and judicialorgans, essential difference exists in theoretical bases,system designs and other ways. It iswrong to lump together the two systems. Meritorious performance in effect can not becompared with the immunity of tainted witness in obtaining evidence. It is appropriated thatthe immunity of tainted witness be instituted some day to solve the problem of how to captureevidence to cope with serious crimes. The intrinsic quality of the meritorious performancesystem lies in the double utilitarianism to both the state and the accused. The meritoriousperformance system’s value is justice as the base and utility as the goal. Its value orientationremains to be that consideration must be given to compromise utility with justice so as topreserve their balance. The meritorious performance system must be preserved because it’sutility value. The idea of favoring one and being prejudiced against the other should beabandoned. Acquiring some criminal clues that indicates other person may be guilty throughillegal means should not be regarded as the meritorious performance because it violates thejustice value orientation seriously.The second Chapter is mainly concerned about the identification of renderingmeritorious service. The requisites of constitution of rendering meritorious service arespecifications by which an action can be identified as rendering meritorious service. There aredifferent understanding about the establishing constitutions of rendering meritorious service,such as two-condition opinion, three-condition opinion, four and five-condition opinion. Theconstitutions of rendering meritorious service should be named correctly so as to avoid anerror in logic and variation. Subjective and confirmative conditions should be excluded fromour discussion. As far as the author’s concern, four constitutions are necessary, which are the subject, the time, the act and the effect requirement. The subject requirement is that the personwho performs meritorious service is an offender who has been accused to committing a crime.The time is started from the crime to an effective judgment or ruling. The active condition isthe five meritorious services stipulated in1997Criminal Law and Judicial interpretations, thelast one means the meritorious service must be true and has exercised objective effects. Thispart also probes into how to understand “another person” and “criminal behavour”in exposingmanifestation of meritorious performance. In such situations as joint crimes, involved offenseand correspondence offense, when an offender makes a clean breast of his crime, hisconfession relate to an offence committed by his accomplice. Can the accomplice be seen as“another person”? Narrowly speaking, an accomplice can been seen as joint offenders, whilehi is an offender who jointly commits the same crime in a broad sense. An accomplice in thelatter lies in joint crimes, correspondence offence and involved offence. When a Joint criminalexposes a joint offence committed by other joint criminals, this exposure can be determined tobe confession, voluntary surrender. As not all correspondence offenders are joint criminals,we can not copy the above mentioned principles on joint criminals in determining the naturethat one party in correspondence offender exposing the other’s crimes. Whether both partiesand only one party constitutes crimes, we must inspect so as to decide whether the admissionhas exceeded his own crimes, If the answer is affirmative, we can conclude that the admissionbelongs to meritorious service. On the other hand, the admission to be voluntary surrender orconfession and it is impossible to be meritorious service. When the involved offender bringsthe principal offender to light, As clearly knowing is the content of subjective constitutiverequirement of involved offender, this confession can be meritorious service.“Criminalbehaviors”is a kind of manifestation which corresponds to objective criminal characteristicsand other person can be aware of.exposing an behavior conducted seriously harmful tosociety by person under criminal responsibility age of with mental disorder, exposing suchcrimes as the limitation period for criminal prosecution has expired, an exemption of criminalpunishment has been granted in a special amnesty decree, the criminal suspect or defendant isdeceased, such behaviors can be determined to meritorious service. Common types that acriminal suspect assists the judicial office in capturing another suspect are the following:pointing out another criminal suspect on the spot, leading the policemen to arrest anothercriminal suspect, providing hiding-place clues to the policemen and telephoning anothercriminal in accordance with policeman’s requirements. Captured criminal suspect is one besides an accomplice. As to producing key clues for solving other cases, the followingshould be paid attention to that clues are different from evidence, that clues must be clear, thatclues must be important, that clues should be verified through investigation. The way ofpreventing another person from conducting criminal activities must be that adopting vigorousmeasures to achieve his aim. The person who is prevented should be ongoing. It is notnecessary to limit the range of “other striking services beneficial to the country and society”tohelp the judicial organs to solve other criminal cases. That a criminal persuades someone togive himself up is this kinds of meritorious service yet that contributes a large sum of moneyis not. Penalty, social influence and major contribution standards are three criteria ofdetermining whether a meritorious performance is major or not. Penalty standard is one thatthe criminal who are exposed maybe given a life sentence or more severe punishment. Penaltyhere is prescribed penalty instead of the sentenced penalty. If the criminal exposed issentenced ahead of the exposing criminal, whether the meritorious service is major or notshould be decided according to the factual sentence of the criminal denounced. It is importantthat criterion of social influence exists, whose practical content can be determined byreference of Sichuan standard in deciding major and important cases in crimes of corruptionand bribery, nonfeasance offence and economic crime. Greater contribution criterion is mainlyabout services having nothing to do with crimes such as having inventions or importanttechnical innovations to his credit. Helping the criminal to perform the meritorious serviceonly exists in assisting the judicial organs to finish litigation action such as tracking down andarresting other criminals Undetained criminal suspect or the defendant gets the informationrelated to other person’s crime from his relative,friends or attorney, then exposes to thejudicial organ,the criminal’s exposition can be deemed to be the meritorious service. It isforbidden that the attorney take advantage of the opportunities of meeting, corresponding withthe criminals to transmit messages to help the criminals to escape penalty. State functionariescan not provide the messages which are from his duty and power to the criminal to escapepenalty. Criminals expose the message obtained from the detained criminals lawfully as longas his exposition can be determined to be the meritorious service. Only when the criminaltakes concerted action in opportunity-providing entrapment other than criminal intententrapment can the criminal’s exposing and assisting behavior be seen as to be meritoriousservice. If the state functionaries taking the responsibilities of prohibiting crimes acquire theclues by which the criminal can achieve to perform meritorious service from his position and power, their exposing and assisting behavior could not be deemed to be meritorious services.As to the verification through investigation, the following are needed to be mentioned: theorgans who enjoy the power to verify are investigating organs; the time length should not beprescribed. No matter whether the criminal who might be sentenced to death performed majoror common meritorious seice,only after his exposing or assisting behavior is verified can hiscase be judged; when the verification to truth is made after the judgement,we should abate hispenalty as to common meritorious service or initiate procedure of second instance to changehis former judgment. If the exposed person is deemed to be criminal because the fact of hiscrime has been ascertained, the evidence is reliable and sufficient, the decision that theinvestigation to be truth can be made. The source of clues must be made clear. Theinvestigating truth must be feed back and the required information must be provided. People’scourt enjoys the power of deciding whether the criminal has performed meritorious service ornot. When the people’s procuratorate decides not to initiate a prosecution with respect to acase that is minor and the offender need not be given criminal punishment or need beexempted from it according to the criminal Law, the people’s procuratorate enjoys thedeciding power.Chapter three focus on the law consequence of meritorious performance, which mainlydiscusses the foundation and the application of commutation of penalty. The main ground forlighter punishment is the reduction of criminal’s personal dangerousness, the secondary one isthe repay for his contribution to the country and society. Meritorious performance belongs tolegal circumstances.It is not desirable that the idea that meritorious performance should bediscretional because the thinking mode is simple, it is not helpful to resolve the problem, it isof little attraction to the defendant and it were legislation retrogression.Meritoriousperformance belongs to circumstance which may rather than must lead to commute penalty.The following are not commutable: the criminal premeditates to render meritorious service.The criminal shows no signs of repentance,the criminal conducts crimes with the most meantrick, the most despicable intention and heaviest social influence etc.When sentencing acriminal rendering meritorious service, the reduction extent shall e imposed based on thefacts,the nature of the crime,the intention,number of times of meritorious service, the orderof a lighter, mitigated punishment,the criminal’s assisting effort.The third section discusseshow to deal with meritorious service coinciding with other lighter, mitigatedcircumstance.For example,several lighter circumstances can not be changed to a mitigated circumstance. If the criminal can enjoy a mitigated punishment because of his meritoriousservice, and at the same time he also has lighter circumstances, it is forbidden that themitigated circumstance assimilates lighter ones. Several mitigated circumstances onlyapproach but can not become one exempted circumstance.The last chapter proposes specific ideas and suggestions on the system’s perfection. Inmy opinion, the system’s perfection shall be discussed from angles of legislative and judicialinterpretation.As to legislative improvement,the article that “Those who not only conductsvoluntary surrender but also renders common meritorious service may be given a lighter orbe exempted from punishment” shall be provided. The stipulation of law consequences aboutthose who conducts voluntary surrender but also renders treat meritorious service is basicallyappropriate, yet in some cases weighing of the penalty may easily be thrown off balance, it isrecommended that the article shall be corrected as “Those who not only conducts voluntarysurrender but also renders great meritorious service shall be given a lighter or mitigatedpunishment or be exempted from punishment”. An article shall be added to Chapter Ⅴ OtherProvisions to clear about meritorious performance and cancel the related sections in Article78so as to harmonize the Criminal Law. As to the perfection of judicial interpretation,meritorious service shall begin after crime. Determination of great meritorious service shallbe gone by actual punishment’s pronouncement except the exposed criminal be sentencedfixed-term imprisonment according to the new circumstances which are formed after theexposing criminal rendered meritorious service.“other prominent contributions to the countryand society” shall be stipulated in more detail. At least, the following shall be added to“Assisting the judicial organs to seize important spoils in other criminal cases, avoiding greatlosses in natural disasters and contingencies, having important inventions to his credit.” Tostandardize the verification and determination tasks about meritorious service, it is necessaryto set up the information and registration procedure, the leading verification organs, theverification through investigation procedure.更多还原