|
刑事责任年龄降低否定论
|
Abstract:
刑事责任年龄规定方式,主要有降低说、补足说和不变说三种主张。支持降低说的学者认为,低龄未成年人犯罪频发应予刑法规制,并且可以满足刑罚一般预防的需要,但采取降低说存在悖于国际要求、犯罪鄙视链与刑罚副作用的影响、将未成年人犯罪原因转嫁于刑法规制不足和未成年人自身等弊端。主张补足说的学者认为应当引入英美法系中的恶意补足年龄规则,以形成未成年人犯罪分级处理的格局,但该观点违反罪刑法定原则且易威胁我国司法的公正性,不宜适用于我国刑事立法。从我国的实际情况出发,充分考虑对未成年人的刑事政策等各方面因素,综合考量,确定现行刑事责任年龄的规定不但符合我国国情,与国际规定相符、契合刑法的价值追求,并且可以满足社会实践的需要,能够兼顾未成年人权益保护与社会稳定的维护,因此现行最低刑事责任年龄的规定应当采用不变说的观点。
About the way how the minimum age of criminal responsibility is set, there are three main propositions: the lowering proposition, the complementary proposition and the no-change proposition. Scholars in favor of lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility believe that the frequent occurrence of crimes committed by underage minors should be regulated by criminal law and that it can satisfy the need for general prevention of punishment, but the lowering of the minimum age of criminal responsibility has the disadvantages of being contrary to the international requirements, the influence of the criminal stigmatization chain and the side-effects of punishment, and shifting the causes of crimes committed by minors to the insufficiency of the criminal law system and the minors themselves. The scholars who advocate the complementary proposition believe that the rule of malicious complementary age in the common law system should be introduced to form a hierarchical pattern of juvenile delinquency, but this proposition violates the principle of the law of crime and punishment and is easy to threaten the fairness of our country’s justice, and it is not suitable to be applied to our country’s criminal legislation. From the actual situation in China, fully consider the criminal policy towards minors and other factors, comprehensive consideration, to determine whether the current age of criminal responsibility is not only in line with China’s national conditions, and international regulations, in line with the pursuit of criminal law values, and can meet the needs of social practice, can take into account the protection of the rights and interests of minors and the maintenance of social stability, so the current minimum age of criminal responsibility provisions should adopt the no-change proposition.
[1] | 赵志疆. 山西大同未成年人欺凌事件: 教不严, 是父之过, 也是校之过丨时评[EB/OL]. 2023-09-26. https://www.sohu.com/a/723679948_120046696, 2025-01-14. |
[2] | 河北省人民检察院. 最高检依法对河北邯郸初中生被害案三名未成年犯罪嫌疑人核准追诉[EB/OL]. 2024-04-08. https://www.spp.gov.cn/zdgz/202404/t20240408_651102.shtml, 2025-01-25. |
[3] | 李振林. 未达刑事责任年龄人实施严重侵害行为的应对[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2018(6): 4. |
[4] | 王登辉. 《刑法修正案(十一)》下调最低刑事责任年龄的正当根据与司法适用[J]. 西南政法大学学报, 2021, 23(4): 107-122. |
[5] | 中国政法大学教材编审委员会. 刑法学[M]. 第6版. 北京: 中国政法大学出版社, 2022: 164. |
[6] | 贾宇, 卢建平, 刘志伟, 等. 刑法学(上册∙总论) [M]. 第2版. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2023: 310. |
[7] | 张勇, 王丽珂. 调整未成年人刑事责任年龄问题反思及对策[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2020(2): 55-63. |
[8] | 刘俊杰. 论降低刑事责任年龄起点的不可行性[J]. 法学杂志, 2020, 41(7): 123-131. |
[9] | 蔡奇轩. 我国未成年人刑事责任年龄最低线之设置[J]. 法学杂志, 2018, 39(11): 56-63. |
[10] | 李豫黔. 未成年人犯罪现状原因及预防治理对策思考[J]. 预防青少年犯罪研究, 2023(2): 23-28. |
[11] | 李昊天, 崔心童. 论《刑法修正案(十一)》刑事责任年龄下调问题——兼论未成年人短期监禁刑行刑方式改良[J]. 预防青少年犯罪研究, 2022(1): 56-66. |
[12] | 杨统旭. 现行刑事责任年龄规定的困境及出路[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2018(6): 13-20. |
[13] | 何萍, 陈松然. 论“恶意补足年龄”规则的价值及本土化途径[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2020(3): 22-32. |
[14] | 张拓. 最低刑事责任年龄弹性化之提倡[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2017(2): 52-58. |
[15] | 王登辉. 降低未成年人刑事责任年龄的基本问题研究[J]. 西南政法大学学报, 2020, 22(4): 74-89. |
[16] | 陈伟, 黄鑫. “恶意补足年龄”规则本土化适用探究[J]. 行政与法, 2021(11): 105-118. |
[17] | 马荣春, 高坤龙. 恶意补足年龄规则的起源、发展与中国化实践[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2021(5): 45-55. |
[18] | 陈艳. 刑事责任年龄弹性规定之我见[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2000(2): 36-38. |
[19] | 王恩海. 应毫不犹豫降低刑事责任年龄[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2020(2): 64-71. |
[20] | 刘宪权, 石雄. 对刑法修正案调整最低刑事责任年龄的商榷[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2021(1): 12-19. |
[21] | 姜敏. 联合国成员国最低刑事责任年龄研究[J]. 法律科学(西北政法大学学报), 2022, 40(2): 89-100. |
[22] | 邓君韬. 年龄与认知: “降低刑事责任年龄”引发的思考[J]. 中国政法大学学报, 2020(4): 33-44, 206-207. |
[23] | 王琛皓, 李一帆. 未成年人恶性犯罪追责——恶意补足年龄规则适用研究[J]. 预防青少年犯罪研究, 2021(5): 31-37. |
[24] | 张明楷. 刑法学[M]. 第6版. 北京: 法律出版社, 2021: 407. |