【作者】 薛静丽；

【导师】 何秉松； 冯殿美；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 宪法学与行政法学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 刑罚权是一柄双刃剑,既能保证人权,也容易侵犯人权。刑罚权是否受到有效的规制,是一个国家是否真正实现法治的重要标志。在建设和谐社会的过程中,如何审慎的使用国家刑罚权,如何使人权防卫贯穿于刑罚权发动和行使的全程,是刑罚权理论研究关注的核心。刑罚权的动态研究是以刑罚权的发展为主线,通过对刑罚权运行和发展基本规律的探索和多维度的论证,研究在法治进程中规范、合理运作刑罚权的路径。全文共分五章,主要内容如下：第一章首先对神授说和契约说这两种刑罚权的起源学说进行介绍和评析,然后考察分析了刑罚权思想经历的历史变迁,并对西方国家刑罚权限制的理念及其文化基础做了详细的论述。在西方,受契约思想的影响,国家的产生被认为是契约的结果,虽然这被认为是一种理论上的假设而不可证实,却为民众埋下了用权利对刑罚权进行制约的伏笔。作为权力和权利关系的规则,自然法则可以说是限制刑罚权的法律上的保证。因为,如果没有民众权利的让渡和认可,刑罚权就不会取得暴力的合法性,只不过这种观念一直被视为是资产阶级阵营的思想,而被淹没在国家本位和高度政治化的主流意识中。第二章分析了刑罚权的发展与法治的生成。刑罚权从扩张滥用到谨慎谦抑地适用是法治从野蛮到文明的标志之一,在刑罚权发展和刑事法治初现的这一历史阶段,法国社会学家涂尔干提出的社会团结理论和福柯对刑罚的权力分析,将刑罚与刑罚权的研究扩展到了法律之外。他们从法社会学不同的视角解读了刑罚权的发展及其与法治的互动,试图理解刑罚作为一套独特的社会过程位于一个更宽泛的社会网络之中的作用,使刑罚权理论融入了更深远的社会因子。从而表明,在刑罚背后存在着各种与犯罪控制的需要无关的社会决定因素,而且刑罚具有超越犯罪控制本身的社会影响。第三章论述了刑罚权的现代演进和刑罚制度的理性回归。刑罚权发展到现代,新社会防卫论、恢复性司法以及刑事和解给传统的刑罚权理论增添了很多新的内容,也表明了刑罚目的的多层次性。刑罚制度的设计更多地关注了犯罪人和被害人本身的发展,降低了刑罚本身所带来的“标签”及“社会心理”等负面效应,并且与刑事政策之间关联紧密。被害人开始享有诉讼上的参与权,因而刑事追诉并非全然是国家统治之事务,而是公共事务之一种,容许被害人对刑事诉讼有影响的可能性。由此也形成了独具特色的恢复性司法制度和刑事和解制度。这些制度体现了刑罚权运行模式的多样性,不仅节约了刑罚资源,而且减少了刑罚对犯罪人的不利影响,利于犯罪人回归社会。第四章探讨了当代刑罚权的理性遏制与部分让渡。经过了刑罚权的现代演进和刑罚制度的理性回归,当代刑罚权的运行更呈现出理性和节制。随着社会契约论逐步成为人类社会文明发展的支撑和法治国家体制法治化的源流,国家独占刑事追诉权的层面已有部分改变。既然国家权力是人民让渡的一份份个人权利的组合,那么,当国家和社会发展到一定阶段,国家权力中的一部分重新还给社会,也就是历史的必然。因此,当代国家刑罚权的部分让渡是符合权力和权利的运行逻辑的,也有助于刑罚权自身的节制和内敛。刑罚权的理性遏制与部分让渡一方面是指刑罚的宽缓与节制,另一层含义是指用民事、行政等措施替代部分刑罚,甚至一部分轻微刑事犯罪的处罚权交由社会行使。主要表现为犯罪者处遇方式的变革、非犯罪化以及非刑罚化。第五章具体考察和评析当今中国刑罚权的动态和刑罚网络的完善。社会背景的影响、法治理念的驯化以及国家治理的转型,促使当今中国的刑罚权运作更加谨慎。刑罚权的触角在逐步呈现出内缩的趋向,刑罚轻缓化、宽严相济刑事政策、恢复性司法和社区矫正等表现刑罚权进步的理念和制度已经不可阻挡地吹响了其前进的号角。但是,在某些方面还不容忽视和乐观,尤其要谨防权力一体和国家本位等理念的消极影响。这些理念必然会导致刑罚权的逻辑舒展在“集体无意识”中走向刑法的威权主义。因此,当今中国的刑罚权理念需要转换为人权防卫理念；刑法机能应该由一贯的只注重社会保护机能转变为同时注重社会保护机能和人权保障机能,刑法立场需要由以权力至上和国家本位为出发点的刑法立场变更为以权利至上和独立的市民社会为出发点的刑法立场；我国的刑罚结构也需要调整,刑事立法理念和制度应放弃重刑思想而取刑罚轻缓化趋向,刑事政策上应切实贯彻宽严相济刑事政策,同时,不可忽视刑法解释对刑罚权的限制功能。更多还原

【Abstract】 Power of penalty is a double-edged sword. It can not only protect human right but also infringe upon human right easily. It is a vital sign of whether a country coming true rule of law or not that if power of penalty is regulated effectively. During building the harmonious society, they are core of attention of theoretical research of power of penalty that how to use national penalty power carefully and how to make human right defense in the whole launching and exerting of power of penalty. We use the subject of on studying the dynamic of power of penalty in order to multi dimensional analyses demonstrate fundamental rules of moving and developing of power of penalty and find the running of penalty power normative and reasonably during rule by law. There are five chapters in the thesis. The main contents are described below.The first chapter introduces and explores divine right of kings and contract doctrine which are two kinds of theory of organic of power of penalty. Then analyses the websphere of thought of power of penalty, and discuss limits logos and culture base of power of penalty abroad. In the West, where people had a well-developed concept of contract, birth of nation is considered result of contract, which deem against reality and unverifiability, but provides joker for people to use civil rights to limit state penalty power. As the legal guarantee for the restriction of penalty power, natural law is regulations on the relationship between the power and the right, because power of penalty can’t has the legality of force without enfeoffment and authorization of rights from people. However, this theory has been viewed as bourgeoisie ideology and submerged in the mainstream ideology of state-orientation and high politicalization.The second chapter analyses the development of power of penalty and the creation of rule of law. It is a symbol of rule of law from savagery to civilization that power of penalty develops from expanded abuse to employ rationality and modesty. During the development of power of penalty and the creation of rule of law, French sociologist Durkheim’s theory of social solidarity and Foucault’s theory of power analyzed to penalty expend the study on penalty and power of penalty beyond law. They unscramble the development of power of penalty and interaction with rule of law from different visual angle of sociology of law. They try to understand the role of penalty as a suit of particular social process in a broad social net. They give the theory of power of penalty more far-reaching social factor. Their theories indicate there are all kinds of social dependent factors without demand of crime curb behind penalty, and the penalty has social effect exceed crime curb itself.The third chapter discusses the modern evolution of power of penalty and rational regression of penalty system. In modern theory of power of penalty, theory of new social defense, restorative justice and victim-offender mediation make the traditional theory of power of penalty increase many new contents. These theories indicate multi-hierarchy of penalty purpose. The design of penalty system gives more importance to development of offender and victim. It is reduced underdog effects of’label’and’social mind’bring by penalty itself. Penalty system became close with criminal policy. The victims begin to enjoy the power of participation on lawsuit. Penal prosecution is far less state ruling affairs completely, but a kind of public affairs. This lawsuit allows victims of effect possibility to criminal proceeding which forms distinctive systems of restorative justice and victim-offender mediation. These systems incarnate diversity of running mode of power of penalty. It not only saves penalty resources but also reduces adverse effect to victims that penalty brings about and is in favor of criminals’reintegration to society.The fourth chapter discusses the rational containment and partially enfeoffment of the contemporary power of penalty. Going by the modern evolution of power of penalty and rational regression of penalty system, the running of contemporary power of penalty takes on rationality and temperance. With the social contract theory becoming support of social development of civilizations and headstream of system legalization of legal state, there are part changes which countries monopolize the power of penal prosecution. Since state power is collection of personal rights of people transferring, it is necessity of history that part of state power return to the society when country and society develop to certain stage. So, that is adapted to running logic of power and right which contemporary power of penalty is partially enfeoffment. It contribute to temperance and withdrawn of power of penalty. There are two means of the rational containment and partially enfeoffment of the contemporary power of penalty. One means relieved and temperance of penalty, the other means use civil and administrative measures to substitute part of penalty, even a part of penalty power of slight crime execute by the society. These measures mostly include revolution of treatment fashion to offender, decriminalization and depenalization.The fifth chapter explores and analyses concretely dynamic of power of penalty and perfection of criminal network in China today. These factors prompt the running of power of penalty more cautious including effect of social background, acclimatization of logos of rule by law and transformation of state governance. The antenna of power of penalty is presenting the tendency of retreat. Some progressive logos and systems indicated power of penalty already sound the bugle forward such as penalty reprieve, criminal policy of temper justice with mercy, restorative justice and community corrections. Of course, some aspects are neglected and optimistic. Particularly we should defend negative effects of logos as power combo and the nation standard penal conception. These logos must lead logic tendency of the power of penalty to authoritarianism of criminal law in collective unconsciousness. Therefore, in today’s China, the logos of power of penalty should be changed human right defense logos. The function of criminal law should be reverted from single social protection to social protection and human rights protection developing simultaneously. The position of criminal law should be changed from body politic standard and power oriented to independent civil society and right oriented. Penalty structure should be adjusted from severe penalty to mitigation of punishment in criminal legislation. The criminal policy of temper justice with mercy should be carried out practically. The function of restriction of criminal law interpretation to penalty power isn’t also ignored.更多还原