【作者】 邓晓霞；

【导师】 刘宪权；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 刑法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 自首制度是以犯罪人的自首行为为评价对象的法律制度,也是我国刑罚制度的重要组成部分。我国自首制度的历史源远流长,然而自首制度的理论却始终未成体系。对犯罪人自首的认定与否直接影响量刑结果,因而自首制度在刑罚制度中占有非常重要的地位。由于理论上在诸如自首行为的本质、自首行为的构成要件等主要问题上尚未达成统一的认识,再加上现行立法关于的自首规定较为简单,导致我国司法实践中自首的认定呈一定的混乱状态。本文从不同的角度对我国自首制度理论进行了较为系统地梳理,并对传统的自首理论进行了一定的反思和批判。全文共分四章,正文约11万余字。第一章主要是考察我国自首制度的历史发展及其影响因素。第一节对我国自首制度的历史发展进行了考察,通过不同时期自首制度的对比总结出我国自首立法中的变化及一定规律。我国自首制度经历了从单行条例、决定到专门立法的变化,从针对特定罪行到针对所有罪行的变化,从条款的简单化到条款具体化的变化。自首制度是上层建筑的组成部分。自首制度的变化反映了不同历史时期经济与政治形势的变化与需求。从不同历史时期的自首规定看,自首制度中大多强调犯罪人的悔过或认罪,甚至将犯罪人的悔改作为认定自首的主要依据或标准。第二节从我国传统法律文化的角度对我国自首认定中一直强调犯罪人悔改的现象进行了较为深入地剖析。认为我国自首认定中长期存在的悔改要求是受德主刑辅的传统法律文化影响,并根源于儒家的“性善论”哲学。德主刑辅思想强调对犯罪人主观上的教化作用,不主张通过刑罚或法律来达到消灭犯罪的目的。对犯罪人主观上的教化一方面可通过外在的力量来实现,如规劝或教导,另一方面可通过犯罪人的内心自首或自我悔改来实现。此外,德主刑辅的儒家思想还主张刑罚的宽和,在惩处犯罪时注重行为人的主观态度,对悔改的犯罪人主张从宽处理。在德主刑辅的思想影响下,自首被认为是犯罪人主观上悔改的表现,是犯罪人弃恶从善的表现,因此对自首悔改的犯罪人应从宽处罚。此外,文中还认为我国自首中的悔改要求根源于儒家的“性善论”哲学。儒家的“性善论”哲学认为人本性是善的,犯恶是外在环境和个人修养的差异,人犯错后只要能从内心自首、悔改,仍可扬善抑恶,达到至善,犯罪人犯罪后只要能悔改,仍不失其善,故因对其善采取宽容态度,对自首应从宽处罚。由于刑事政策对刑事立法、刑事司法具有较大的影响,第三节从刑事政策的角度对不同历史时期自首制度的变化进行了一定的分析。认为在现行宽严相济刑事政策的影响下,我国立法应对自首的适用条件适当放宽。在司法实践中,对一些法无明文规定或规定不明确的情形,可以以宽严相济的刑事政策为指导裁量能否认定自首,在认定时可适当放宽要求。此外,还认为“宽”应与“严”相济,“严”是指自首的认定必须在现行法律的框架下进行,应严格遵循现行法律关于自首的规定来认定自首,司法人员不应各行其是或咨意司法。第四节论及现代法治理念和刑法谦抑性理念对自首制度的影响。认为加强自首制度的立法,以及在司法过程中严格遵循法律的规定是法治的必然要求。从刑法谦抑性的角度说,自首制度中应进一步扩大自首的适用范围,减少刑罚的适用。第二章中主要探讨了我国现行自首制度的类型和行为。第一节对传统自首理论认为刑法第67条第1款是自首定义或自首本质的观点进行了反思,并从逻辑学的角度对自首的概念、自首的定义、自首的本质作了区分。认为我国刑法67条第1款并非自首概念的定义或本质。我国刑法中其实并未对自首这一概念进行抽象、概括地定义,只是规定了自首的三种类型,即典型自首、准自首和特别自首。刑法67条第1款只是自首的类型之一,即典型自首。文中还对一些学者认为准自首系法律拟制的观点进行了反驳,认为准自首和典型自首都属于自首的类型或自首的表现形式,并不存在法律拟制的问题。第二节以自首行为研究对象展开探讨。从内在和外在二方面对自首行为进行了深入地分析。自首行为的内在方面主要从心理学的角度阐述了自首动机的形成机理。认为由于犯罪后的某些心理导致了犯罪人的安全需要,当其安全需要达到一定程度必然产生向外寻求保护的内驱力,这一内驱力便是自首动机的主要来源。犯罪人的悔改心理是导致其安全需要的诸多心理之一。悔改心理并非形成自首动机的唯一心理,自首行为也不一定是悔改心理的外在表现。因此,将自首看成是悔改的表现,或将悔改心理作为认定自首的标准或依据都是没有科学根据的。自首行为外在方面是指自首行为的外在客观表现。自首行为的认定应以自首行为的外在方面为依据。文中还对传统自首理论中关于自首行为未完成形态的划分进行了批判,认为我国自首行为的认定只有成立与不成立之分,不存在自首的未完成形态问题。第三章探讨了自首行为的本质和自首制度的价值。第一节主要否定了自首行为本质的通说,即“自首行为的本质是犯罪人犯罪后自己将自己交付国家追诉”。认为自首的类型或自首的表现形式并非自首的本质,自首行为的本质应是各种自首类型或自首表现形式的抽象共性。自首行为的本质是犯罪人犯罪后实施的、被国家接受和认可的妥协与合作活动。犯罪人与国家之间的妥协与合作是双方在相互对抗的局面中进行利益博奕的结果。文中认为坦白的情形也符合自首的本质,在宽严相济的刑事政策的影响下,未来立法中应将坦白的情形,即犯罪人被动归案后,自愿、如实供述其已被司法机关掌握的罪行的,视为自首,从而进一步放宽自首的适用范围。第二节探讨了自首从宽的理论依据。对传统自首从宽的理论依据进行了反思和批判。认为社会危害说和人身危险说均非自首从宽的理论依据。自首制度本身所具有的价值才是自首从宽的理论依据。文中从自首的内在和外在价值两方面阐述了自首从宽的正当化根据。内在价值主要体现为正义和效益两方面。外在价值主要体现为有助于刑罚一般预防和特殊预防目的的实现。第四章主要探讨了自首行为的构成要件。第一节认为自首行为的一般构成要件包括主体、客体和客观方面。犯罪人的自首心理或自首动机不应作为自首行为的构成要件。在自首行为的主体要件方面,主要探讨了单位能否为自首主体的问题。文中认为单位可以为自首主体,同时认为,只有在实行双罚制的单位犯罪中才存在单位自首认定的必要,在单罚制的单位犯罪中无认定单位自首的必要。文章认为单位直接负责的主管人员或其他直接负责人员实施的自首行为可视为单位自首行为,在单位直接负责的主管人员或其他直接责任人员因病、伤等特殊情形无法及时实施投案自首行为的,委托其他人员先代为投案的,也可视为单位自首。文章反驳了单位自首应反映单位整体意志的观点。认为单位自首的认定主要应考虑实施自首的自然人主体的适格性和客观方面的内容,不需要考虑是否反映单位整体意志等主观方面的内容。在自首行为的客观要件方面,认为犯罪人的如实供述是一切自首行为的必备要件。自动投案并非一切自首的必备要件,但与被动归案下的自首相比较,自动投案通常具有更大的效益价值和社会价值,立法应在自首从宽的幅度上将两者相区别。第二节主要探讨了自动投案情形下的自首,即典型自首的构成要件。典型自首认定的疑难主要是自动投案的认定疑难,文中对司法解释中自动投案的相关规定进行了反思,归纳出自动投案的统一认定标准,即自动投案应以司法机关采取强制措施对犯罪人人身进行了实际控制或限制为标准,并通过实证分析来论证这一标准的可行性。第三节主要探讨了准自首的构成要件。文中认为刑法关于准自首主体的范围较窄,应予以扩大,被动归案后至服刑完毕之前的犯罪人都可为准自首的主体。文中还认为司法解释将司法机关尚未掌握的本人其他罪行解释为异种罪行属于越权解释。准自首既包括犯罪人如实供述司法尚未掌握的同种罪行,也包括如实供述司法机关尚未掌握的异种罪行。第四节主要对特别自首与其它自首竞合的情形进行了探讨。认为在特别自首与典型自首竞合的情形中,以及特别自首与准自首竞合的情形中,总体应按特别条款优于一般条款的原则优先适用特别自首的规定。更多还原

【Abstract】 The legal system of Criminal’s Surrender takes criminal’s specific behavior as evaluation object. It is also one of important parts of criminal penalty system. Actually, legal system of Criminal’s surrender has a long history in China, but some theories on it have never been reached an agreement. As we all know, validation of criminal’s surrender has some decisive impacts on measurement of penalty, but validation of criminal’s surrender in legal practices is always vague and confused since there are no agreements on those issues, such as nature of criminal surrender’s behavior, constitutive requirements of surrender behavior. Plus, some relatively simple and obscure provisions in criminal law are also the reasons. The dissertation is trying to review some theories on those issues from different perspectives and elaborately rethink some traditional theories and practices on the subject.The dissertation includes four chapters which occupy about 110,000 Chinese characters.In the first chapter, I mainly review historical development and analyze some elements which affect legal system of criminal’s surrender. There are some changes and some similarities between different legal systems of Criminal’s surrender in different ages. The formation of legal system has been through the changes being from specific regulations, rules to specific legislation, being from aiming at specific crimes to applying to all crimes and being from some simple provisions to concrete provisions. The legal system belongs to one part of superstructure which reflects economic and political changes and needs of different ages. The legal system places strong emphasis on the criminal’s confession, and even always validates criminals’surrender behaviors based on criminal’s confession. In the second section I made in-depth analysis of the reason why criminal’s confession has always been regarded as a prerequisite of criminal’s surrender from the perspective of Chinese traditional culture. I consider that it is affected by those Chinese traditional philosophies that kindness is highly valued and penalty should be secondly considered .Human nature is always kind. Those philosophies emphasize that educating criminals is more important and effective than punishing them. Criminals could be educated by two methods. One is external method, such as other people’s persuasion. Another is internal method, just like confession. Criminal’s surrender is just performance of criminal’s confession. Those people who have sense of confession deserve to be forgiven. Therefore, those criminals who have sense of confession,if they turn themselves in ,they should be given a lighter or mitigated punishment. The third section analyzes different changes in different ages from the perspective of criminal policy. It considers that constitutive requirements of criminal’s surrender behavior should be expanded. Furthermore, judicial officials should abide by law and regulations when they validate criminal’s surrender behavior. The fourth section discusses the effects executed by rule of law and efficiency principle of criminal law. It considers that strengthening legislation of criminal’s surrender and following law and regulations on criminal’s surrender are required by rule of law. As far as efficiency concerned, application of criminal penalty should be restricted.The second chapter mainly discusses types of criminal’s surrender and behavior of criminal’s surrender. the first section rethinks academic conclusion that the first provision in Article 67 of criminal law is concept of criminal’s surrender or nature of criminal’s surrender.Moreover,it analyzes differences between concept of criminal’s surrender ,definition of criminal’s surrender and nature of criminal’s surrender. The second section discusses behavior of criminal’s surrender. It makes in-depth analysis of the behavior from external and internal sides. It elaborates the formation of surrender’s motive. There are many psychological minds which result in criminal’s surrender motive. Sense of Confession is just one of them. Therefore, sense of confession shouldn’t be considered as necessary requirement of criminal’s surrender behavior. It also criticizes the viewpoint that there exist unfinished forms of criminal’s surrender behavior and proves its incorrectness.The third section mainly argues the nature of criminal’s surrender and value of legal system of criminal’s surrender. The first section denies traditional theory about the nature and considers its exact nature is activity of compromise and cooperation between criminal and the nation. The activity is result of“game theory”between both of two sides. The second section discusses the theoretical basis of legal system of criminal’s surrender. It criticizes theory of social harm and theory of criminal’s physical danger and believes that value of the legal system is the point. Its internal value concerns justice and efficiency. Its external value involves the penalty functions of general prevention and special prevention.The fourth chapter discusses that constitutive requirements of criminal’s surrender behavior. The first section considers that the general requirements include legal entity, legal object and objective aspect. The motive or psychological minds shouldn’t be considered as a component. As far as subject concerned, it argues the problem whether the unit could be legal entity of criminal’s surrender or not, and believes that the unit is entitled to be legal entity. Criminal’s truthful statement is necessary component of criminal’s surrender behavior. Being compared with surrender under the condition of being captured, Voluntary surrender has much more efficient value and much more social value. So the legislation should distinguish between them and place high value on the latter. The second section mainly discusses voluntary surrender. It debates the related articles and provisions in criminal law and Supreme Court’s judicial explanations. It concludes that uniform standard of how to validate voluntary surrender, which is that judicial officials confine or restrict the physical freedom of criminal by executing enforcement measures. Furthermore, elaborate analysis of legal practical cases is aiming to prove feasibility of the conclusion. The third section mainly discusses and analyzes quasi-surrender. It believes that the scope of legal entity in quasi—surrender is limited and should be expanded. And also considers that the Supreme Court’s judicial explanation on this topic is beyond Supreme Court authority. In the Quasi-surrender, it includes two categories of crimes which have something in common that they haven’t been investigated by judicial officials. One category has the same nature with the crimes which have been investigated by officials .another category have different nature with crimes which have been investigated by officials. The fourth section discusses the concurrence problem between voluntary surrender and special surrender, between Quasi-surrender and special surrender. It considers that, in generally speaking, special provisions should be given prior consideration. Therefore, special surrender should be validated prior to other types of surrender in those situations.更多还原