您的位置: 首页 » 法律资料网 » 法律论文 »

为了共和国刑事法治的完善——访中国人民大学刑法学博士生导师赵秉志教授/赵秉志

作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-06-03 18:13:19  浏览:8155   来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载
为了共和国刑事法治的完善——访中国人民大学刑法学博士生导师赵秉志教授

2001年2月9日 14:07 本报记者 晏向华
  赵教授的声名,在法学界可以说是如雷贯耳。对赵教授的采访计划,也是列于“法学英才”栏开办之初。遗憾的是,几次与赵教授联系未果。对于这次迟到的采访,我深有对名家不恭的忐忑,而赵教授根本不以为意,并且以最快的速度给我提供了所需资料。
  对于这样一位知名教授,一篇短短的采访文章实在是难以表其丰硕。这里仅以素描方式建立起其基本形象:赵秉志,新中国首届刑法学博士,国家重点研究基地中国人民大学刑事法律科学研究中心主任,中国人民大学法学院副院长、刑法学博士生导师,兼任中国法学会刑法学研究会副会长等多种全国性学术职务,发表论文400余篇,出版个人专著、主编及合著书籍150余部,人们常以“著作等身”形容一个人的成果斐然,可是赵教授早已是著作超身了。对于一个年富力强的学者,你可以想见其中的勤勉和渊博。
  对于中国刑法学的发展,赵教授可谓是倾尽心血。1988年至1997年,作为全国人大常委会法工委刑法修改小组主要成员之一,他始终参与了中国刑法典的修改工作。他主张对刑法观念进行更新和变革,树立经济刑法观、效益刑法观、民主刑法观、平等刑法观和开放刑法观。对于刑法中的一系列问题,他提出了自己独到的见解,这里仅择要予以介述:
  其一,罪刑法定原则的立法化与类推的废止问题。我国1979年刑法典没有明确规定罪刑法定原则,且在第七十九条规定了类推制度。要不要废除类推制度?这一问题曾经在学者之中产生过诸多争议。赵教授旗帜鲜明地认为,类推不利于法治和人权的保障,罪刑法定原则的立法化符合世界刑法发展潮流,有利于刑事立法的不断完善,有利于强化刑事司法。赵教授和其他一些学者力倡的这一主张得到了立法者的采纳,1997年修订的刑法典第三条明文规定了罪刑法定原则。
  其二,关于死刑的立法完善。赵教授认为,重刑主义思想是同态复仇报应观念的反映,立法者对死刑的作用应有冷静、客观的认识。过分崇尚和依赖死刑,则必然会使法律失去正义性和合理性,从而失去公众的尊重和支持。他提出坚持以总则和分则相结合控制死刑,对经济犯罪和财产型犯罪原则上可考虑删除死刑,从尊重人的生命权利,推进刑罚文明与进步等诸方面看,尽量减少甚至在将来条件成熟时逐渐废除死刑,应是我国立法、司法的指导思想。
  其三,对犯罪主体的研究。赵教授认为,犯罪主体通过影响刑事责任程度进而对刑罚产生重要影响。主要表现在:因犯罪主体情况的影响而从宽、从严适用刑罚或者是限制刑种的适用。他早在1987年即明确主张刑法对已满14岁不满16岁未成年人负刑事责任的罪种范围应当明确限定,并主张对不满18岁的未成年人不适用死刑,这些主张在我国新刑法典中都得到了立法的采纳与体现。
  其四,关于妨害司法活动的立法完善。1979年的刑法典分则对这类犯罪没有集中规定,而是分散地规定于若干章节中。1988年应国家立法机关邀请参加修改刑法典的起草与论证工作后,赵教授提出了增设妨害司法活动罪专章的建议。随后,他又以此为题申报了国家社会科学基金青年项目,并推出了有相当深度的研究成果《妨害司法活动罪研究》。在他的倡导下,1997年修订的刑法典分则第六章第二节设立了“妨害司法罪”专节,并增设了妨害证据罪、破坏监管秩序罪等新罪名。
  多年来,赵教授在异常繁忙的教学科研工作之余,还抽出相当精力参与许多重大学术活动。这里简列如下:参与中国刑法典的修改和研拟工作;参与国家最高司法机关司法解释创制、疑难案件的咨询工作;参与国务院学位委员会和北京市学位委员会的学科评议工作;参与全国刑法学科的学术组织与协调工作;参与国家港澳台事务主管部门的有关法律研究与咨询工作。
  在我与赵教授联系采访事宜时,他又即将赴法国、德国讲学和研究。透过赵教授永远匆匆的身影,我们可以看到我国法学建设繁荣而光辉的前景。


下载地址: 点击此处下载

最高人民法院关于剥夺选举权利问题的电话答复

最高人民法院


最高人民法院关于剥夺选举权利问题的电话答复

1963年5月22日,最高人民法院
一、关于剥夺选举权利能否独立适用的问题。剥夺政治权利的刑罚是一种附加刑;人民法院在审理刑事案件中不能独立适用。而剥夺选举权利是剥夺政治权利的一项具体内容,除根据选举法受理的选民资格案件以外,在审理刑事案件中更不能独立适用。
二、关于剥夺选举权是否同时剥夺被选举权的问题。人民法院根据选举法受理的选民资格案件,判决剥夺选举权利的,当然是既剥夺选举权也剥夺被选举权;在判决书中应写明剥夺选举权和被选举权。
三、关于剥夺选举权利是否应当写明剥夺多长时间的问题。人民法院根据选举法受理的选民资格案件,判决剥夺选举权利的,应须定出剥夺的期限。
四、来文中对受理选民资格的案件,判决剥夺选举权利的,提到用裁定书,是不适当的,应当用判决书。



The Draft Constitution and Human Rights Protection in European Union

周大勇 (Zhou,Dayong)

1 the general introduction of the draft constitution in aspect of the human rights
2 short review of the human rights protection in European Union
3 the new points in aspect of human rights in the draft constitution
3.1 common values
3.2 incorporation of the Charter of fundamental rights
3.3 other changes could affect the human rights
4 arisen questions
4.1 the protection different from under the Convention
4.2 the two courts system and its application
5 conclusions in a historical view




1 general introduction of the draft constitution in aspect of the human rights

“Conscious that Europe is a continent that has brought forth civilization; That its inhabitants, arriving in successive waves from earliest times, have gradually developed the values underlying humanism: equality of persons, freedom, respect for reason” Extract from the preamble to the draft Constitution

In past 16 years, the European Union (EU hereafter) has marked itself through a series of changes. From The Single European Act, in which the Union committed itself to create a single market and at the same time establish on its territory the freedom of movement of people, goods, services as well as capital, to Maastricht Treaty, which brought the Union into reality and led to common foreign policy and cooperation in the area of justice and internal affairs as a higher level cooperation among Member States. Then the following Amsterdam (1997) and Nice (2001) Treaties, strengthened cooperation in foreign and security policy and placed Justice and Home Affairs matters and established the frame for the Union as a legitimate institution, in which people from different nations integrated in a large region would have common historical direction and splendid future before them. Just before the door of enlargement of the Union, it was argued that the Union has to improve democracy and transparency as well as efficiency, in order to outlines the EU’s purpose and competence clearly and streamline structures so as to prevent paralysis, therefore a new constitution for the Union is determined to replace the EU's series of key treaties in passed over the last 50 years as a single document .

Under leading of former French President and master draftsman Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the European Convention set about its work of drafting the European Union's first ever full-fledged constitution. With the convention's work completed, the draft must now be finalized by an Intergovernmental Conference of European leaders that is expected to complete deliberations by the end of the 2003. As far as our topic is concerned, noticeably modifications come out in the constitution contract, first of all, the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which we will discuss later. In the beginning it is meaningful to consider the statues of the draft constitution in the progress course of the Union. The Union desires to bring peace and prosperity, to promote economic and social progress through continuously integrating market and expanding freedom under light of united institution and social systems . These goals, however, are the foundation of development and protection of human rights . That means, if we regard human rights as a series right which realized at first in peaceful and law-ruling society, then the Union has already kept on entrenching to appreciate these goal from beginning on, and now by means of perusing such goal in a larger region through enlargement, the EU’s influence extent to broader area and more people.

The draft constitution then in such context should be viewed as another historical phase in the process. Because the promoting of well-being and fortune of people depend not only on the development of economic situation and adding some single freedom clauses into the governmental documents, but also upon the entire politic system and background in which we live. Without governing based on democratic and effective institutional structure, and especially a ripe legislation and judiciary mechanism, the realization and protection of human rights could only be on the paper. This is also one of the motive caused the Declaration on the future of the European Union which committed the Union to becoming more democratic, more transparent and effective, in order to pave the way for a Constitution in response to the expectations of the people of Europe . In this perspective, one shall recognize the Constitution as a moving forward step of the whole EU institutionalization targeting its goal, so that to discuss the Constitution in connection with the human right protection, it is helpful to review the human rights protection in Europe and, especially in EU.

2 short review of the human rights protection in European Union

The protection of human rights has been internationally come to life in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 (UDHR) with reorganization of disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind and respect for inherent dignity as well as the equal rights of all members of the human. This declaration states explicitly that the rights and freedoms of humans have to be guaranteed without distinction and destruction by any group, state or person. These principles were broadly accepted by European countries, considering the origin of the EU (EC) and the historical separation in Europe after WWII, we denote only the contracting countries of European Community.

For the Member States of EC, the Council of Europe has been up to now the most important instrument, which established in 1949 as a result of the Congress of Europe in The Hague , and took for the basic of the human rights protection. The Council accepted the principles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and integrated it into The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights (the Convention hereafter), which and its 12 Protocols turned out to be the significant resource for Human Rights protection in Europe. Because of the existence of the Convention, the other two organizations established in the same age aftermath of the Second World War, i.e. OEEC and the European Communities didn’t include relevant clauses for Human Rights protection into their founding treaties. Since it was agreed at that time, the Council of Europe would focus on the protection of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democratic values, whereas the OECD and the European Communities were to be concerned with the economic restoration of Europe. The reason of separate organizations was based on a view to avoiding economic excuses for future inhumanity. Another reason came from the thought, which believed that the process of economic integration set forth in the Community Treaties could not lead to a violation of human rights. Furthermore, the original Member States in the Treaty of Rome feared, that the inclusion of a "bill of rights" in the Treaty might have brought about an undesirable expansion of Community powers, since it could lead Community institutions to interpret their powers as extending to anything not explicitly prohibited by the enumerated guarantees.

Under the regime of Council of Europe, a lots of achievement of human rights improvement has been reached , yet along with the development and expansion of EU, another mechanism on protection of human rights which does not totally rely on the Council of Europe has derived out on one hand, on the other hand being lack of provisions ruling human rights protection in the Treaty establishing EC did not prevent the EC and the later European Union from providing care for the protection against the violations on human rights. Naturally, how could a swelling supranational organization as EC, which has been continually strengthening its power in all social aspects, does not involve in human rights issues especially when the consciousness of human rights nowadays become more significant both in international and national stages? Regarding to EU, The protection system has been formed in three aspects.

First of all, the legislation in the Member States of EU. Since there were no Member States of EU (EC) which accedes to the Community without being a member of the Council of Europe, and according to the Convention, it impose obligations on the Member States that they should ensure that the internal laws and practices comply with the human rights standards set out in the instruments. Very member states in EU have recognize the principles derived from the Convention and incorporated them somehow into national laws, most importantly, provided constitutive protection as the basic legal resource for human rights protection. For example in Germany, Basic Law (Grundgesetz) Art 1 to 19 deliver explicit provisions even beyond the Convention; the same case as Part VIII (§71-85) in Constitution of Denmark ; in Britain the Act of Human Rights came into force on 2 October 2000 steers extending a ways, in which the Convention can be used before domestic courts. Certainly, according to the classic human rights lessons, the basic protection of human rights could only be afforded at the national level through national legislation and excise of authoritative power.

Secondly, the institutions and legislation at the EU level acts also with high respect to the human rights protection. The EU has showed its commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms and has explicitly confirmed the EU's attachment to fundamental social rights ever since its establishment.

The Amsterdam Treaty established procedures intended to secure their protection. It was ascertained, as a general principle, that the European Union should respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, upon which the Union is founded. For the first time a procedure is introduced, according to which severe and continuing violations of Fundamental Rights can lead to suspension of voting and other rights of a member state, if the Union determined the existence of a serious and persistent breach of these principles by that Member State. As to the Candidate countries, they should also respect these principles to join the Union. Furthermore, It has also given the European Court of Justice the power to ensure respect of fundamental rights and freedoms by the European institutions. In accordance with the inner requirement for the implementation of development cooperation operations, in order to reach objective of developing and consolidating democracy, EU also need its rule respecting for human rights. Such cases we have are for instance the EU Council’s regulation on human rights, Council Regulation (EC) No 975/199 and Council Regulation (EC) No 976/1999 for example, are aimed at providing technical and financial aid for operations to promote and protect of civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights etc.

Likewise, at their meeting in Cologne in June 1999, EU leaders declared that in respect to the current stage of progress of the European Union, the fundamental rights applicable at Union level should be pushed forward, namely be consolidated in a Charter and thereby made more evident. They argued, that the legal resources of human rights protection come from not only the European Convention of Human Right, but also from various international conventions drawn up by the Council of Europe as well as the United Nations and the International Labor Organization, they also include EU treaties themselves and from the case law of the European Court of Justice. As a result, a Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter hereinafter) was sketch out, which highlighted the EU’s respect for human rights, for fundamental freedoms and for the principle of democracy through listing more rights a more precise definition of the common values comparing the early documents including the Convention. We will continue to concentrate on the Charter in point 3 since it has been integrated in the draft Constitution as an outstanding achievement.

Finally, the opinion and case-law of European Court of Justice (ECJ hereafter) also have immense impact on the establishment of the instrument of human rights protection within EU.

Although the jurisprudence developed by the ECJ recognizes the Convention as the standard-setter in cases in which the Court has to consider and decide a human rights issue, since there were no relevant legislation existed in the frame of the Community, the ECJ furnish itself power in this aspect by means of case-law. Earlier in 1974, the ECJ first made reference to the ECHR in the Nold judgment, in which the ECJ emphasized its commitment to fundamental human rights based on the constitutional traditions of the Member States’ fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of law which the Court enforces. In assuring the protection of such rights, the Court is required to base itself on the constitutional traditions common to the Member States and therefore could not allow measures, which are incompatible with the fundamental rights recognized and guaranteed by the constitutions of such States. The ECJ declared, that the international treaties on the protection of human rights in which the Member States have cooperated or to which they have adhered could also supply indications which may be taken into account within the framework of Community law.

That implied, even without clear regulations in the treaties, the remedy against violation on human rights could also be provided within the framework of the Community in respect for the common traditions applied to the Member States, and in connection with we have mentioned about the Member States’ above, the principles and resource applied to the Member States derived from the Council of Europe. Thus a EU standard could be established by transform a rating comparison of the members’ legal systems to the case-law in ECJ in respect for human rights.