本文選題：少數(shù)民族習(xí)慣 + 刑事責(zé)任　； 參考：《貴州民族研究》2017年09期

【摘要】：少數(shù)民族承擔(dān)刑事責(zé)任的寬緩化政策與刑法面前人人平等原則并不矛盾,兩者具有實(shí)質(zhì)辯證關(guān)系。在具體實(shí)施時(shí),由于少數(shù)民族政治、經(jīng)濟(jì)、文化發(fā)展的特殊性,部分風(fēng)俗習(xí)慣可能與刑法規(guī)定發(fā)生沖突,刑法的處罰范圍應(yīng)當(dāng)限縮。通過(guò)民族自治地方立法變通的途徑,對(duì)基于習(xí)俗實(shí)施的身體傷害行為調(diào)低刑罰配置,對(duì)非法經(jīng)營(yíng)行為進(jìn)行非犯罪化處理,對(duì)破壞環(huán)境管理秩序犯罪加強(qiáng)立法規(guī)定的明確化等,達(dá)到法律效果和社會(huì)效果的協(xié)調(diào)統(tǒng)一。
[Abstract]:There is no contradiction between the lenient policy of criminal responsibility of ethnic minorities and the principle of equality before criminal law. Due to the particularity of political, economic and cultural development of ethnic minorities, some customs and habits may conflict with the provisions of criminal law, and the scope of punishment should be limited. Through the way of legislative adaptation in national autonomous areas, we should lower the penalty allocation for the body injury behavior based on custom, decriminalize the illegal business behavior, strengthen the clarity of the legislative provisions on the crime of destroying the order of environmental management, etc. To achieve the legal and social effects of coordination and unity.
【作者單位】： 中山大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D924.1
，

本文編號(hào)：1792017