（刑法学专业论文）资格刑研究.pdf

1 摘摘 要要 我国资格刑主要包括剥夺政治权利和驱逐出境两种，无论是在理论上 还是实践中都存在着很多不完善的地方。这不仅有违我国社会的发展趋 势，也与现代刑罚轻缓化的发展趋势相背离，妨碍了资格刑刑罚功能的发 挥以及我国刑罚体系的科学化。基于此，本文尝试将我国资格刑与外国资 格刑进行比较研究，借鉴和吸收外国资格刑的成功立法经验，希望能对我 国资格刑的完善有所裨益。 全文共约三万五千字，主要内容包括以下四部分： 第一部分为资格刑概述。第一部分为资格刑概述。本部分提出了资格刑的概念、特征及历史， 并在此基础上引出了理论界对资格刑存废之争论。资格刑作为一个刑罚分 类的理论概念，刑法学家长期以来对其定义都是众说纷纭，莫衷一是。笔 者在汇集理论界对资格刑定义的基础上对各家主张作出评析，提出了笔者 所认同的资格刑定义并明确了其特征。接着介绍了资格刑的历史沿革，包 括了资格刑的起源、报应刑时期的资格刑、目的刑时期的资格刑及现代资 格刑的发展趋势，如此我们可对资格刑的发展脉络有一个比较好的把握。 紧接着在上述论说的基础上，引出刑法理论界对资格刑存废的争论，列举 了存废双方的理由。笔者在客观地评析资格刑存废双方理由的基础上，指 出资格刑利大于弊，保留资格刑才是正确的选择。但要看清资格刑所具有 的弊的一面，需要对其进行完善，以达到抑弊求利的目的。 第二部分为外国资格刑的立法及实践。第二部分为外国资格刑的立法及实践。本部分笔者从资格刑的法律地 位、种类、对象、期限、适用方式、资格刑复权方面对外国的资格刑立法 逐一作出介绍。首先，纵观世界各国立法，资格刑的法律地位主要有六种 情形。笔者认同世界绝大多数国家将资格刑作为附加刑的法律定位，这有 助于资格刑功能的发挥。接着笔者介绍了外国资格刑的种类。接下来对资 格刑的适用对象、资格刑的期限及适用方式作出简要介绍。最后，介绍了 国外对资格刑立法具有重要意义的复权制度。通观各国复权立法，国外的 复权制度也分为广义复权（资格刑前科消灭）和狭义复权（资格刑减刑） 两种，笔者在区分两种复权概念的基础上肯定了狭义复权制度，并建议我 国建立复权制度时应以狭义复权制度为借鉴蓝本。 第三部分为我国资格刑立法现状。第三部分为我国资格刑立法现状。虽然理论界对我国资格刑种类存在不 同意见，但笔者认为我国资格刑种类应以刑法的内容规定为限，我国刑法典 2 仅规定了剥夺政治权利和驱逐出境两种资格刑。在此前提下，笔者对剥夺政 治权利和驱逐出境中存在的理论分歧分别作出论述。一、对于剥夺选举权与 被选举权，笔者认为对于选举应当作出狭义理解，与宪法学上对其理解保持 一致；将言论、出版、集会、结社、游行、示威自由这些公民的基本权利作 为资格刑剥夺内容的立法在全世界中唯有我国，且对这六大自由的内涵法律 并未作出专门解释，学者们也是分歧很大，这导致了我国此项立法具有模糊 性，给法律实践带来了难题。也有学者建议将上述权利限定在“政治性”的 范围之内，笔者认为这没有宪法依据，也没有宪法学依据，更不具有可操作 性，故而应当将这六种自由的剥夺排除在资格刑之外。二、对于剥夺政治权 利的适用对象根据我国法律规定可归纳为四类一般适用对象，但对于未成年 人这种特殊对象，我国现行法律规定存在未成年人可适用剥夺政治权利资格 刑的情形，笔者认为这与世界大趋势不符合，也不符合我们党和国家对未成 年人实行特殊保护的政策，因此笔者建议我国应借鉴大多数国家立法经验， 在刑法中明确规定未成年人不适用资格刑。三、对于剥夺政治权利的适用期 限，我国法律分为终身剥夺和定期剥夺两种。笔者认为我国立法规定的定期 剥夺年限范围过小，不利于法官根据刑罚个别化原则充分行使自由裁量权， 也不利于犯罪分子改过自新的激励，因此笔者建议将我国资格刑的期限改为 1年以上10年以下，拓展资格刑量刑空间和减刑空间，增强其灵活性。四、 对于驱逐出境我国刑法并未规定其所适用的期限，学者们也是分歧很大。笔 者认为我国刑法应当借鉴国外立法经验，在刑法中明确规定驱逐出境的期 限。 第四部分是本文的重点所在， 笔者在以上三部分论述的基础上指出了第四部分是本文的重点所在， 笔者在以上三部分论述的基础上指出了 我国资格刑的不足，并提出了一些完善措施。我国资格刑的不足，并提出了一些完善措施。通过我国资格刑立法与国外 资格刑立法的比较， 笔者认为我国资格刑立法存在如下问题： 1.种类单一、 作用面小；2.适用对象不够明确具体；3.适用方式缺乏针对性，有过于严 苛和不公正之嫌，易造成刑罚过剩，不利于刑罚预防犯罪目的的实现；4. 缺乏激励机制，不利于调动资格刑犯改造的积极性，有碍资格刑犯尽快回 归社会。因此，笔者认为我国资格刑应从种类、适用对象、激励机制及立 法制度上同时下手进行完善。第一，顺应时代潮流将政治斗争色彩浓厚的 剥夺政治权利这一称谓修订为剥夺公权。第二，取消“剥夺言论、出版、 集会、结社、游行、示威自由的权利” 。第三，以现有法律、法规对职业 （技能）资格的处罚为依托，增设职业（技能）资格刑。目前，我国刑法 可考虑将职业资格刑分为专业型、防范型两类。第四，调整资格刑适用对 象。一方面限制资格刑的适用对象，对于“被判处死刑、无期徒刑的犯罪 3 分子”与“对于故意杀人、强奸、放火、爆炸、投毒、抢劫等严重破坏社 会秩序的犯罪分子”一般情况下没有必要附加适用资格刑，除非该犯罪的 实施与资格的行使相关；另一方面扩大资格刑的适用对象，如我国刑法第 八章贪污贿赂罪、第九章渎职罪都应当增加适用资格刑的规定。第五，引 入资格刑立法选择制，使法官可根据犯罪人及其实施犯罪的不同情况，可 以有选择地剥夺其部分或全部内容，从立法上保证资格刑的适用能做到罚 当其罪，从而保证刑罚适用的公正性。第六，完善资格刑罪犯激励机制， 建立资格刑复权制度。笔者认为建立资格刑复权制度必须要解决的是复权 的时间、表现条件、程序问题并相应地提出了完善建议。 关键词：关键词：资格刑 刑罚体系 剥夺政治权利 驱逐出境 1 abstract qualification punishment mainly includes eliminate the political rights and deports in china，either in theory or in practice there are many imperfect places. this is not only a violation of the development trend of china society, but also leaves contrarily with the modern penalty leisurely trend of development, it has hindered the qualification punishment penalty function display as well as our country penalty systems scientific style. based on this, my article attempts to carries on our country qualification punishment and the foreign qualification punishment quite studies, absorbs the success of the foreign qualification punishment. i hope this can have a benefit to our country qualification punishment consummation. this article includes the following four parts: the first part is qualification punishment outline. this part proposed the qualification punishments concept, the characteristic and the history, based on this drew out the argument of the theorists. the qualification punishment takes the theory concept which a penalty classifies. the criminal law scientist has divided opinions to its definition, but unable to receive agreement, the author collects theorists to the qualification punishment definitions foundation, defines to make the evaluation, proposed the authors qualification punishment definition, the qualification punishment is refers to eliminates the perpetrator to be engaged in the right ability. based on this and has been cleared the qualification punishment characteristicmultiplicity、 non-materiality、 slightly、efficiency. then introduced the qualification punishments historical evolution, introduced the qualification punishments origin, the retribution punishment times qualification punishment, the goal punishment times qualification punishment and the modern qualifications punishments trend of development. this has a quite good assurance to the qualification punishment development vein. is following ,in above dissertations foundation, draws out the criminal law theorists to save the 2 waste argument to the qualification punishment, has saved waste all quarters the reason. the author is evaluating the qualification punishment to save the waste bilateral reason objectively in the foundation, pointed out that any kind of penalty has the advantages ambiguity, the qualifications punishment advantage is bigger than the disadvantage, the retention qualification punishment is the correct choice. but must know shortcoming which the qualification punishment has, needs to carry on the consummation to it, achieve damps the goal which the shortcoming seeks for profit. the second part is foreign qualification punishment legislation and practice. this part, author introduces the qualifications punishments legal status, the type, the object, the deadline, the suitable way, the qualification punishment rehabilitation aspect. first, the qualification punishments legal status mainly has six situations. the author approves the world overwhelming majority country to take the qualification punishment as the accessory punishment; this is helpful to the qualification punishment function to display. then the author introduced the foreign qualification punishments type, mainly has the following six kinds. then the qualification punishments suitable object, the qualification punishments deadline and the way to make the brief introduction. finally, introduced another country has the influential role rehabilitation system to the qualification punishment legislation. passes the view various countries rehabilitation legislation, the overseas rehabilitation system also divided into the generalized rehabilitation and the narrow rehabilitation two kinds, the author in differentiates two kinds of rehabilitation concepts in the foundation definitely the narrow rehabilitation system, and suggested our country established when the rehabilitation system should take the narrow rehabilitation as the foundation. the third part is our country qualification punishment legislation present situation. although theorists of our country qualifications punishment have different opinions, but the author thought that our 3 country qualification punishment type should stipulate by the criminal law content, our country criminal law has only stipulated eliminates the political rights and deport. based on this, the author introduce eliminates the political rights and deports separately., first, the scholars regard the voting right and the right to be elected, but the author thought that it must make the narrow sense to understand, in maintains consistent with the constitution study to its understanding;. the opinion, the publication, the assembly, form association, the parade, the demonstration free these citizens basic right to eliminate the content as the qualification punishment, the legislation only to have our country in the world, and has not made these six big free connotation law explained specially, the scholars also have the difference, this caused our country this item to legislate to have the fuzziness, has brought the difficult problem for the legal practice. also some scholars suggested that the above rights are defined in “political nature”, the author thought this does not have the constitution basis, also does not have the constitution study basis and have the feasibility, therefore it must eliminate these six kinds the elimination outside the qualifications punishment. second, regarding eliminates the political rights the suitable object to be possible to induce according to our country legal rule into the harm national security criminal offender, condemns the death penalty and life imprisonments criminal offender, the heavy damage social order criminal offender, may independent eliminate the political rights suitably the criminal offender four kinds, but regarding minor this kind of special object, our country current law stipulated that has the minor to eliminate the political rights qualifications punishment suitably the situation, the author thought this does not tally with the world general trend, also does not conform to our party and the country implements the special protection to the minor the policy, therefore the author suggested that our country should profit from the majority national legislation experience, in the criminal law stipulated explicitly the minor is not suitable the qualifications punishment. third, regarding eliminate the political rights the suitable deadline, our country 4 law divides into lifelong eliminates. the author thought that our country legislates stipulate eliminates the age limit scope to be too small, it does not favor judge to decide after deliberation the power according to the penalty individualizing principle full use freedom, also not favor criminal offender start with a clean slate the drive, therefore the author suggested that our country qualification punishments deadline will change between 1 year to 10 years, the development qualification punishment discretion of punishment space and the commuting a sentence space, strengthen its flexibility. fourth, our country criminal law does not stipulate. what is suitable the deadline, the scholars also have the difference. the author thought that our country criminal law must profit from the overseas legislative experience, stipulate explicitly deports deadline in the criminal law. the fourth part is this articles key point. the author pointes out our country qualification punishments insufficiency and propose the perfect measure in the above three part of elaborations foundation. through our country qualification punishment legislation and the overseas qualification punishment legislations contrast, the author thinks our country qualification punishment legislation existence the following question: 1. the type is unitary; the active surface is small; 2. it is suitable the object insufficiently to be clear concretely; 3. it is suitable the way to lack pointed, has too severe and the unfair suspicion, easy to cause the penalty to be surplus, does not favor the penalty prevention of crime goal realization;4.lacks the incentive mechanism, does not favor the reassignment qualifications punishment to violate the transformation the enthusiasm, obstructs the qualifications punishment to violate returns the society as soon as possible. based on this, the author thought that our country qualification punishment should from the type, the suitable object, in the incentive mechanism and the legislative system simultaneously starts to carry on the consummation. first, complies with the trend of the times too thickly to eliminate the political struggle color the political rights to change eliminates civil rights. second, cancels “eliminates the 5 opinion, the publication, the assembly, the parade, the demonstration free right”. third, take the existing law, the laws and regulations to the occupation (skill) the qualifications punishment as the backing, the addition occupation (skill) the qualifications punishment. at present, our country criminal law may consider that divides into the professional qualifications punishment, the guard. it is suitable the object for the embezzlement, the bribe, to invade the property, to divert the property and the destruction social economy order criminal. four, the adjustment qualification punishment is suitable the object. on the one hand ,the limit qualification punishments suitable object, regarding “it is condemned the death penalty, life imprisonments criminal offender” and “regarding the voluntary manslaughter, rapes, sets on fire, the detonation, the poison, to rob and heavy damage social order the criminal offender” in the ordinary circumstances ,it is unnecessary attachment to be suitable the qualification punishment, only if this crimes implementation and the qualification exercise related; on the other hand, the expanded qualification punishments suitable object, like our country criminal law eighth chapter of embezzlement crime of bribery, the ninth chapter of misconduct offense are suitable, the qualification punishment the stipulation. five, the introduction of qualification punishment legislation choice system, causes judge to be possible to act according to the perpetrator and the implementation crime different situation, may have the choice to eliminate its part or the complete content, from the legislation guaranteed that the qualifications punishment is suitable can make punishes works as its crime, thus guarantee penalty suitable fairness. six, the perfect qualification punishment criminal incentive mechanism, establishes the qualification punishment rehabilitation system. the establishment qualifications punishment rehabilitation system must solve the rehabilitation time, the performance condition, and the point of order and proposed correspondingly consummates the suggestion. key word: qualifications punishment penalty system eliminate the political rights deport 1 目目 录录 引引 言言 . 1 1 一、资格刑概述一、资格刑概述 . 2 2 （一）资格刑的概念与特征 . 2 （二）资格刑的历史沿革 . 4 1.资格刑的起源 . 4 2.报应刑时期的资格刑 . 5 3.目的刑时期的资格刑 . 6 4.现代资格刑的发展趋势 . 7 （三）资格刑存废之争 . 9 1.存废之争 . 9 2.利弊评说 . 11 二、外国资格刑的立法及实践二、外国资格刑的立法及实践 . 1515 （一）资格刑的法律地位 . 15 （二）资格刑的种类 . 17 1.剥夺公权 . 17 2.剥夺亲权或其他民事权利 . 18 3.剥夺从事一定的职业或营业的权利 . 19 4.剥夺从事一定活动的权利 . 19 5.剥夺荣誉称号、军衔等 . 20 6.剥夺国籍和驱逐出境 . 20 （三）资格刑的适用对象 . 21 2 （四）资格刑的期限及适用方式 . 22 1.资格刑的期限 . 22 2.资格刑适用方式 . 23 （五）资格刑复权 . 24 三、我国资格刑立法现状三、我国资格刑立法现状 . 2626 （一）剥夺政治权利 . 26 （二）驱逐出境 . 30 四、我国资格刑立法的反思与完善四、我国资格刑立法的反思与完善 . 3131 （一）我国资格刑立法的反思 . 31 （二）完善我国资格刑的设想 . 32 结结 论论 . 3535 参考文献参考文献 . 3636 1 引引 言言 当今世界各国刑法的发展呈现刑罚轻缓化的显著特征，刑罚已经由过 去的以生命刑、自由刑为中心，转变为以自由刑为中心。随着人类社会的 发展和人类文明程度的提高，资格刑的设立与适用会越来越受到立法者与 法律实施者的重视，资格刑在刑罚体系中的作用也将愈加明显。正如我国 有的学者所言：市场经济必然导致大幅度的削减死刑，死刑的减少必然导 致财产刑和资格刑适用概率的增长， 实现刑罚趋轻。 1然纵观我国关于资格 刑的规定还比较简单、笼统，并且随着时代的变迁，我国资格刑并未跟上 时代前进的步伐，可以说我国资格刑已经不能满足新时代的需要。因此， 对于资格刑亟待从理论上对其进行深入探讨以完善立法，满足司法实践的 需要。 目前我国刑法理论界关于资格刑的专著不多，很多学者在他们的著作 中往往将资格刑略加提及而简短带过。因此，应如何完善资格刑对于我国 学者来说可谓任重而道远。笔者希望拙文能起到抛砖引玉之作用，对我国 资格刑的完善进些微薄之力。 1 储槐植、蒋建峰： “经济全球化与犯罪控制对策” ， 山东公安专科学校学报 ，2002 年第 2 期，第 26 页。 2 一、资格刑概述一、资格刑概述 （一）资格刑的概念与特征（一）资格刑的概念与特征 资格刑不是一个法定刑种，而是一个刑罚分类的理论概念。长期以来 刑法学者都试图为资格刑下一个完美的定义，刑法学家众说纷纭，莫衷一 是。 台湾地区学者林山田认为： “资格刑乃国家剥夺犯人担任公务员或为 公职候选人资格以及享有公法上之权利的法律效果。 ” 2台湾地区学者张甘 妹认为： “资格刑者，剥夺犯罪人一定之资格，以减损其名誉之刑罚。 ” 3台 湾地区学者韩忠谟认为： “资格刑为剥夺犯人享有公权能力之刑罚。 ” 4大陆 学者较为通行的资格刑定义是： “资格刑是剥夺犯罪人享有或行使一定权 利的资格的刑罚。 ” 5也有学者认为： “所谓资格刑，是指为了预防犯罪而剥 夺犯罪人从事某种活动所必需的权利能力或身份的一种较轻的刑罚方 法。 ” 6 笔者认为上述定义都有一定的道理，但均有一定的缺陷。林山田先生 所下之定义仅仅把资格刑所剥夺的资格局限于“享有公法上之权利” ，有 定义过窄之嫌。因为资格刑所剥夺的资格除了公法上的权利外，还可以包 括民事上的权利。其定义对担任公务员或为公职候选人两种资格的列举， 从定义的简洁角度讲也无必要。张甘妹先生所下定义中的“一定资格”语 意含混，不能确切表明是何种资格，且该定义又把“以减损其名誉”作为 资格刑之目的，这有违现代刑罚的宗旨。韩忠谟先生所下之定义把资格刑 所剥夺的资格仅限于公权，未能涵盖其他可剥夺的资格，同样犯了定义过 窄的错误。大陆学者较为通行之资格刑定义中“享有或行使某些权利的资 格”的表述将“权利”与“资格”两个内涵基本相同的概念作为不同的概 念来处理有违逻辑。学者竹怀军、张青和所下定义较为详尽，但在资格刑 定义中写上“为了预防犯罪”这一所有刑罚之目的有画蛇添足之嫌。且其 定义中将“一种较轻的”写入并不科学，这不足以将资格刑和其他刑罚相 区别。如在我国刑罚中的管制刑，这也是一种较轻的刑罚。 因此，笔者认为资格刑是指剥夺犯罪人从事某种活动所必需的权利能 2 林山田： 刑罚学 ，台北： （台北）商务印书馆，1983 年版，第 307 页。 3 张甘妹： 刑事政策 ，台北： （台北）三民书局，1979 年版，第 347 页。 4 韩忠谟： 刑法原理 ，北京：中国政法大学出版社，2002 年版，第 292 页。 5 马克昌主编： 刑罚通论 ，武汉：武汉大学出版社，1999 年版，第 220 页。 6 竹怀军、张春和： “资格刑定义之我见” ， 广东法学 ，1995 年第 6 期，第 32 页。 3 力或身份的刑罚方法。该定义具有科学定义所要求的概括、抽象特点，并 且揭示了资格刑的本质特征，能将其与生命刑、自由刑、财产刑等刑种相 区别。 据上定义，资格刑具有如下特征： 1.多样性。即资格刑的种类比较多。生命刑、自由刑、财产刑所剥夺 的权利都是单一的。生命刑剥夺的是生命，自由刑剥夺的是自由，财产刑 剥夺的是财产。生命、自由和财产虽然都可以根据不同的标准作不同的分 类，但作为一种刑罚在现代社会没有必要，事实上也没有因这种不同的分 类而设计不同的刑罚。有期徒刑、无期徒刑、管制等不同的刑种的产生， 是立法者根据其时间长短和剥夺自由的程度不同而设计的，而不是根据自 由本身的性质不同所设计的。而资格刑由于社会上存在的公民从事某种活 动所应具备的资格的多样性，立法者就可以根据这些不同的资格设计不同 的资格刑刑种以适应打击犯罪的需要。这就使资格刑呈现出多样性的特 征。 2.非物质性。即资格刑给受刑人造成的直接痛苦和限制是非物质性 的。生命刑给犯罪分子带来的是生命的丧失，自由刑给犯罪分子带来的是 自由的丧失，财产刑给犯罪分子带来的是财产的损失。虽然它们也都给犯 罪人带来精神上的痛苦，但这毕竟是次要的和伴生的。而资格刑则主要是 给犯罪分子造成一定精神痛苦以及某些职业选择等方面的限制。虽然资格 刑在一定的情况下也可能给受刑人带来可得利益上的损失，但这毕竟是次 要的和间接的。 3.轻微性。即资格刑是一种总体上比较轻的刑罚。刑罚的分类方法之 一是根据刑罚的轻重分为重刑和轻刑，资格刑应该属于较轻的刑罚之列。 这是由于资格刑所剥夺的利益比较次要这一特点