论文部分内容阅读
普通法国家通常将最后手段原则视为是道德原则,德国学界却普遍认为其为宪法原则。最后手段原则与比例原则有相同的诉求,即也由适当性、必要性和权衡性等三个子原则构成。然而,由于最后手段原则主要表达的是权力主体的一种自我克制义务,再加上法益概念的模糊性和民主制度,所以,该原则虽有批评功能,但很难获得司法适用力。只有当刑法禁止与民法或者其他法律发生冲突,最后手段原则能反映被告人的权利时,其才具有直接限制刑法禁止适用范围的功能。而三阶层犯罪论体系保持构成要件要素与正当化事由的分立,并赋予后者有否定符合刑法禁止的行为的违法性的效力,所表达的其实就是最后手段原则的外部诉求。而两阶层犯罪论体系主张符合性判断与违法性判断合并,实际上否定了最后手段原则司法适用的路径,而且,还忽视了强调形式理性的公法与不拒绝实质判断的私法无法融合的问题,特别是,这种做法也违反了宪法上的分权制度。如果将两阶层犯罪论应用于司法实践,要么会造成司法积极主义的泛滥,给法院的司法活动带来政治风险,要么会使法院不敢充分利用其他法律资源,解决刑法有可能因过分强调一般预防而出现的不当扩张问题。
Common law countries generally regard the principle of last resort as a moral principle, while German academics generally consider it a constitutional principle. The principle of last resort has the same aspiration for the principle of proportionality, that is, it consists of three sub-principles: appropriateness, necessity and trade-off. However, since the principle of last resort mainly expresses an obligation of self-restraint of the power main body, together with the fuzziness of the concept of legal interest and the democratic system, it is difficult to obtain the judicial power because of its criticism function. Only when the criminal law prohibits the conflict with civil law or other laws and finally the principle can reflect the defendant’s rights, does it have the function of directly restricting the scope of application of criminal law. However, the third-level criminalism system maintains the separation of elements and justification of constitutional elements, and gives the latter the validity of illegitimating the behavior that is prohibited by the criminal law. What is expressed is actually the external appeal of the principle of last resort. However, the system of two-level crime advocates the combination of conformity judgment and illegality judgment, which in fact negates the path of judicial application of the last resort principle. Moreover, it ignores the problem that public law emphasizes formal rationality and private law that does not refuse substantive judgment, In particular, this practice also violates the constitutional decentralization system. If the two-level crime theory is applied to judicial practice, it will either cause the proliferation of judicial activism and bring political risk to the judicial activities of the court or make the court afraid to make full use of other legal resources to solve the criminal law may be over-emphasized The problem of improper expansion of prevention.