论刑事财产没收制度
On the Criminal Property Forfeiture System

刑事没收制度是一项法律原则和规则，国家通过法律武器从罪犯或第三方处没收与犯罪密切相关的某些财产，并将其归还国库。作为一种附加制裁措施，没收财产在中国主要通过强制没收犯罪人的个人财产来实现惩戒和教育功能。然而，由于立法缺失、执行不力、监督机构缺位等原因，没收财产在司法执行中面临困难。对于刑事财产没收制度是否已经不适应时代的发展而被摒弃，在学界一直以来存在着较多的争议，除了绝对的废除论者与保留论者，还有学者主张辩证看待其中的具体问题。总体上来说，现如今的刑事没收体系有着亟需改进的弊端，包括判决不够具体明确可能导致国家无权占有以及在没收实施过程中客体的不特定等问题，但通过深入分析，应当认为财产没收制度仍有其不可废除的理由，着力于从立法和实践上弥补存在的漏洞是更为稳妥的方案。应完善资产没收的相关立法和执行制度，加强相关监督，并考虑各方的合法利益，以达到制裁的预期效果。
The criminal confiscation system is a legal principle and rule whereby the State confiscates from the offender or a third party, by means of a legal weapon, certain property closely related to the commission of a crime and returns it to the State treasury. As an additional sanction, confiscation of property in China mainly fulfills a disciplinary and educational function through the compulsory confiscation of the personal property of the offender. However, confiscation of property has faced difficulties in judicial implementation due to lack of legislation, ineffective implementation, and the absence of a supervisory body. Whether the criminal property confiscation system has not adapted to the development of the times and has been abandoned, there has been more controversy in the academic community, in addition to absolute abolitionists and retentionists, there are also scholars who advocate a dialectical view of the specific issues involved. Generally speaking, today's criminal confiscation system has the urgent need to improve the shortcomings, including the judgment is not specific enough may lead to the state without the right to possession and confiscation in the implementation of the process of the object is not specific and so on, but through an in-depth analysis, it should be considered that the property confiscation system still has its own non-abolition of the reasons, and efforts to make up for the loopholes from the legislation and practice is a more prudent program. The relevant legislation and enforcement system for asset confiscation should be improved, the relevant supervision should be strengthened, and the legitimate interests of all parties should be taken into account in order to achieve the desired effect of sanctions.