【作者】 梅象华；

【导师】 梅传强；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 刑法学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 中央“宽严相济”刑事政策出台后，刑法学界对大陆法系刑法谦抑原则的研究遂成为时髦话题。一般认为，谦抑原则包括三个方面内容：第一，刑法的补充性，即使是有关市民安全的事项,只有在其他手段如习惯、道德的制裁即地域社会的非正式的控制或民事的规制不充分时,才能发动刑法；第二是刑法的不完整性。如果像上面那样认为刑法具有补充性的性质,那么,发动刑法的情况自然是不完整的；第三是刑法的宽容性,或者可以说是自由尊重性。我国学者多主张移植此原则来指导我国刑事立法与实践，而彻底地坚持刑法谦抑原则的结果必然是立法上的非罪化、轻刑化和司法适用上的轻缓化，事实上，撰文刑法谦抑的学者得出的结论也是如此。谦抑原则说明刑法在维护市民安全事项上对于民事法、行政法和道德规范有谦让、抑制的一面，限制了刑法以刑罚为手段的调整范围，一定程度上给予和保障了公民更多的自由和权利，有其积极合理的要素，然放置于我国犯罪构成体系中是否适恰和妥当，是值得考究的问题。我国极少数学者在吸纳谦抑原则的合理内核后，结合我国刑法文化的历史传统和犯罪构成理论，指出刑事立法、司法和执行上必须以我国的政治、经济和文化传统为基础、以宪法规范为范围来设定入罪、出罪机制、行为不得已构成犯罪就不能无原则的谦抑和宽容了，即刑法不得已原则。刑法不得已原则不仅能体现刑事活动运行慎用刑罚，体现刑法人权保障机能也能国家维护社会秩序的社会保护机能，并使二者平衡和协调。该论文除绪论外，共分五章，前三章为理论篇，后两章为适用篇。绪论。绪论部分主要就目前我国刑事立法修正频繁，对立法上将某些社会现象作为犯罪纳入刑法规范中究竟要遵循什么原则即为什么要将此种行为作为犯罪而不将彼种行为作为犯罪对待的思考；刑事司法上广泛盛行的刑事和解，是否违背了刑法不得已原则；刑事执行上某些对犯人的人性关怀制度出台，为什么现代很流行，其背后的价值指向是什么。这些都是促使写作该文的动因。第一章，刑法不得已原则的概述。大陆法系刑法谦抑原则应该是符合其定罪模式和犯罪成立理论，其在罪名上的繁多表明犯罪圈的宽泛也为刑法谦抑提供了现实依据。我国犯罪构成理论在认定犯罪时四个要件齐备，则构成犯罪，出罪机能本身不如大陆法系成立三阶层理论明显，观念上没有谦抑的思维；我国犯罪概念不仅定性而且定量，很大程度上将大陆法系认为是犯罪的行为早已排除出犯罪之外，形式上也缺乏谦抑的现实基础或者紧迫性。刑法谦抑原则不能得出或者不承认刑法有独立的调整对象，刑法只是其他法律的保障法，即具有断片性；而刑法不得已原则则认为刑法有自己独立调整对象，从逻辑上得出刑法的调整对象为全体公民基本人权和公民个人基本人权之间的冲突关系，基于朴素的紧急避险原理，为保护全体公民基本人权而不得已动用刑罚来剥夺公民个人（犯罪人）基本人权就具有正当化的根据。由于有犯罪“量”的规定性，国家就不能以全体公民基本人权保护为目的擅自剥夺犯罪人的基本人权，“不得已”在价值指向上更注重不轻易举起刑罚之剑。刑法不得已原则的概念为：在道德、习俗和其他法律不能有效调整社会关系时，才由刑法调整；如果不用刑法调整，相应的法律制度就会崩溃，人民群众利益从根本上将受到威胁。由此概念，得出其属性表现为：观念上的趋轻性、性格上的内敛性、技术上的量规定性和运用上的相对性。第二章，刑法不得已原则的功利性价值取向。价值指向主要说明为什么某些行为作为犯罪原因。国家是法律的制定者、实施者和执行者，代表全体公民的意志，刑事法运行各个环节应该体现国家的功利性（功利性是自由、秩序、效率和平等等价值的综合性判断）。而公民个人（犯罪人）的行为侵犯了全体公民基本人权，破坏国家的主流价值评价体系，违背国家管理社会秩序正常运行的功利性，就可能被刑法进行否定性评价。犯罪人同样有自己的功利性选择，寻求自身不被刑罚处罚的利益最大化选择，即公民个人功利性。整个刑事运行过程，都应该考虑这两种功利的博弈和平衡，考虑其行为犯罪还是非犯罪、重罪还是轻罪。第三章，刑法不得已原则在刑法体系中的地位。该原则在刑法中应处于最根本性的地位，因其从刑法调整对象即调整全体公民基本人权和公民个人（犯罪人）基本人权的关系而得出不得已牺牲犯罪人的基本人权，这是审视刑法三大基本原则运用的基本要求，即形式上与实质上都符合构成要件的“犯罪”是否真的危及到全体公民基本人权；也是刑事政策制定的底线，是基本的刑事政策。其在刑法规范中应与刑法目的置于同一法条，即《刑法》第1条。第四章，刑法不得已原则对刑事立法的指导意义。犯罪三个特征为社会危害性、刑事违法性和应受刑罚惩罚性。该原则坚持对行为的危害性评价应以该行为实施所处时代政治、经济和文化背景，以及在此基础上上升为宪法规范的内容，社会的主流价值观念等因素来考量，刑事立法还有受到国际公约的影响；对行为的违法性上则从形式上与民法、行政法和道德边界来划分，指出刑法与这些法律和社会规范特点和表现不同；对行为的应受惩罚性上，坚持以报应为主兼采功利。这些在方法论上都坚持了客观事实基础判断犯罪三特征符合唯物史观。第五章，刑法不得已原则对刑事适用的指导意义。对于司法，基于刑法之不得已，对于裁判可能出现违情悖理的，根据全案事实能不作为犯罪就不作为犯罪，能用轻刑就用轻刑；对于行刑，能用非监禁刑就不用监禁刑。这样更突出对人的尊重和犯罪人的人权保障。基于客观事实的认定和人民群众不能容忍的事实，刑法也不能迁就。更多还原

【Abstract】 After the implementation of the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy on thepart of the central government, the research on the mainland’s prosperity of the austerity ofcriminal law in the circles of criminal law has become a hot topic. It is generallyacknowledged that the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy contains three aspects:first, the supplementary quality, which means criminal law can only be implemented whenother informal control and civil regulation such as the sanction of habits and morality are notenough. Secondly, the incomplete quality. If the supplementary quality of criminal law isadmitted, the situation under which the law is applied is surly incomplete. Thirdly, thecriminal policy is tolerant, or puts it in another way, respect freedom. Quite a few scholars inour country advice to transplant this principle to guide the criminal legislation andimplementation. in our country, but the result of firmly adhering to this principle is that thosewho should be criminalized will be set free and those who should be heavily punished will belightly punished in legislation and those who should be punished soon will be put off..Actually, the scholars who study the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy alsocome to this conclusion. This policy shows the modesty and restrain on the civil regulationand criminal regulation and morality in terms of safeguarding the safety of citizens and limitsthe scope for adjusting by the means of punishment, providing the citizens more freedom andrights to some degree. It has its own upsides. However, whether it is proper to apply it to oursystem of constitution of crime is a problem deserving of study. a tiny minority of scholars,after absorbing the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy and combining thehistorical tradition and system of constitution of crime in our country, point out thatlegislation, judicature enforcement of criminal law should be based on the politics, economyand cultural tradition, the judgment of whether criminal or not should be within the allowanceof Constitution and those who have committed crime with no other choice should not beforgiven and tolerated unprincipledly----this is so-called “No alternative” principle incriminal law. This principle can not only reflect the carefulness in implementing criminal lawand Safeguard Mechanisms, but also the protection of the social order and balance betweenthese two.This essay, apart from the introduction, contains five parts. The first three chaptersdiscuss the theory and the rest two the application, Introduction: this part is a consideration of the frequent remedy of legislation in criminallaw in our country and analysis of what principle should be followed in deciding why thisbehavior is a committing of a crime while that is not; Whether The popularvictim-offender-reconciliation in Criminal Justice goes against “no alternative” principle?Why the care of human nature is so popular in criminal implementation these days? What isthe value behind it? These are all the reasons for myI writing this essay.The first chapter deals with the notion and attribute of “no alternative” principle. Thecriminal policy of tempering justice with mercy in the China’s mainland being in line with thejudgment of whether criminal or not is the reason why I write this essay. The multiplicity ofthe name of crimes reveals the wide scope of criminal circle and the provides evidence forthis principle. According to the theory of constitution of crime in our country, if four elementsare all presented, a crime is justified.The Mechanisms of setting free, having no concept of tempering justice with mercy, isnot so obvious as the law in China’s mainland which has divided the theory into three steps.The crime in our country is not only certain in characteristics but also in quantity, excludingthose behaviors which are considered as crimes in China’s mainland. the criminal policy oftempering justice with mercy does not admit independent targetfor adjusting. Criminal law isjust safeguarding for other law and it is one-sidely. However, the “no alternative” principleadmit that criminal law has its own independent target of adjusting----the conflict betweenthe basic human rights of the public and the individual human rights. Based on the simpleprinciple of “emergent avoiding” principle, resorting to criminal law to deprive the individualof rights in order to safeguard the basic human rights is justified. Since the “quantity” hasbeen stipulated, the nation should not deprive the individuals of the basic human rights in thename of protecting the basis rights of the public.” no alternative” principle will not resort tocriminal laws which is used only when the morality, habit and other law cannot adjust thesocial relationship and when, if the adjust with the criminal law, the legislative regulation willcollapse and do great harm to the public. Therefore its attribute is: tending to be light inconcept, to be introvert in character, to be regulated in techniques and to be relative inapplication.The second chapter tackles with the value orientation of utilitarian of the criminal policyof tempering justice with mercy. The value orientation mainly illustrates why some behaviorscan be considered as the reason of committing crimes. The nation is the stipulator, implementer and enforcer of the law which stands for the will of the whole citizens. Everylink of the criminal law should embody the utilitarian.(Utilitarian refers to the comprehensivejudgment of the freedom, order, efficiency and equality.)individuals (criminals) whosebehavior have invaded the basic human rights of all the citizens, undermined the mainstreamvalue-judging system in our country and gone against the of utilitarian of the normal socialorder, will be negatively valued by the criminal law. the criminal also has his own utilitarianchoice and they can search the choice with maximum benefits without being punished, this iscitizen’s individual utilitarian. In the whole process of implementation of the criminal law, weshould consider the conflict and balance of these two to make a sound judgment betweencriminal and non-criminal acts and high crimes and misdemeanors.The third chapter mainly discuss the status of “no alternative” principle in criminalsystem. This principle is a basis in criminal law for the reason that the target for adjusting is toadjust the relationship between the basic human rights of the whole citizens and theindividuals (criminals)and the individuals’ basic rights should be scarified if it is necessary.This is the basic requirement of the three principle on measuring the criminal law, namely,whether the “criminal” really undermine the basic human rights of all the citizens in form andsubstance.. This is also the bottom line of stipulation of the criminal policy. This principleshould be put in the same article with the purpose of criminal law, Article One in CriminalLaw.The fourth chapter is about the meaning of guidance of the “no alternative” principle tocriminal legalization. Crime is characterized by jeopardizing the society, going against the lawand being bound to be punished. This principle holds the idea that all the evaluation ofwhether the behavior is harmful to the society should be based on the political, economic andcultural background of the times, the constitution, the mainstream value concept and influenceof the international conventions, the idea that all the violation of the law in form should bedecided by the civil law, administrative law and morality, pointing out that the differentcharacteristics and representation between criminal law and these laws and regulations andthe idea that they should be punished because of their evil doings All these methods live up tothe three characteristics of judging whether a crime can hold water and in line with materialistconception of history。The fifth chapter is on the meaning guidance of the “no alternative” principle to thejudicature and enforcement of criminal law. On the basis of this principle, in judicature, the crime should not be justified when the judgment is incompatible with reason, and should beset free and extenuated after measuring the facts. In enforcement imprisonment will not beresort to if non-imprisonment is enough. This will highlight the respect for human beings andthe safeguard for criminals. But on the identification of the objective fact, for those behaviorswhich goes beyond the tolerance of the masses, criminal law will not make concession.更多还原