本文選題：巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源不明 + 不能說(shuō)明��； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：法律條文總是帶著制定時(shí)期的時(shí)代烙印。隨著社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的騰飛，，政治變革的深入，制定時(shí)的特定條件發(fā)生了改變，此時(shí)，法律與現(xiàn)實(shí)情況難免產(chǎn)生沖突，因而需要及時(shí)的修正或者作出合理的解釋以適應(yīng)發(fā)展變化的社會(huì)生活。我國(guó)刑法中的巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源不明罪是1997年首次規(guī)定的將其納入貪污賄賂罪一章的。隨著貪腐現(xiàn)象的日益猖獗，反腐工作的深入開(kāi)展，該罪的相關(guān)規(guī)定在適用中顯現(xiàn)出許多缺陷，特別是法定刑較其他貪污、賄賂罪過(guò)輕，無(wú)法適應(yīng)現(xiàn)實(shí)中遏制貪腐歪風(fēng)、打擊犯罪的迫切需求，因此2009年全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)通過(guò)的《中華人民共和國(guó)刑法修正案（七）》，提高了該罪的法定刑。根據(jù)我國(guó)刑法的原有規(guī)定，犯此類(lèi)罪應(yīng)當(dāng)被判處最高五年有期徒刑，而該修正案中明確規(guī)定了該罪的最高刑期為十年有期徒刑。盡管修正案七在一定程度上提高了法定刑，但是這樣的方式并沒(méi)有改變?cè)撟镌谪澪圪V賂罪一章中法定刑偏低，量刑幅度簡(jiǎn)單的問(wèn)題。由此在很大程度上影響了刑罰體系化，也無(wú)法解決該罪在適用中的困境，本文探討本罪適用困境的具體表現(xiàn)以及造成此現(xiàn)象的深層原因，并大膽探析對(duì)策以謀求解決適用困境之道。 本文約三萬(wàn)五千字，除引言部分，主體分為三大部分： 第一部分，該罪的適用困境主要表現(xiàn)在：一是該罪司法程序啟動(dòng)具有附隨性，該罪司法程序的啟動(dòng)一般伴隨其他貪污賄賂犯罪偵辦過(guò)程中無(wú)法確定巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源時(shí)方可啟動(dòng)偵查，缺乏普適性和獨(dú)立性。二是實(shí)踐中對(duì)于犯罪主體認(rèn)定困難，缺乏統(tǒng)一標(biāo)準(zhǔn)造成承辦具體案件的司法人員對(duì)主體范圍認(rèn)定不同，這違背了罪刑法定的原則，損害了刑法的權(quán)威性和確定性。三是本罪的共犯和自首認(rèn)定也存在著困難，本罪特殊的犯罪構(gòu)成，使得共犯和自首的認(rèn)定存在著一定的特殊性。 第二部分，造成巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源不明罪適用困境的原因：一是法理原因，包括該罪設(shè)置的價(jià)值選擇沖突，即公正與效益價(jià)值選擇的沖突；關(guān)于本罪犯罪類(lèi)型之爭(zhēng)，集中在于持有型犯罪和不作為犯罪的分歧；對(duì)于“不能說(shuō)明”的性質(zhì)認(rèn)定困難，即其是否為犯罪構(gòu)成要件的爭(zhēng)議。二是制度原因，缺乏完善的前置性制度——財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度，沒(méi)有完善的前置性制度，就使得該罪作為不作為犯罪缺乏必要的邏輯構(gòu)成要件；且沒(méi)有有效的監(jiān)管來(lái)保障財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度的落實(shí)。三是立法原因，法律規(guī)范的設(shè)計(jì)存在缺陷，表現(xiàn)為罪狀描述存在歧義，主體范圍界定不明，財(cái)產(chǎn)范圍簡(jiǎn)單模糊；入刑門(mén)檻過(guò)高破壞刑法體系的合理性；刑罰設(shè)置的不合理，包括法定刑較低，量刑幅度粗糙簡(jiǎn)單缺少檔次。正是由于這些原因，使得該罪在適用中存在著很多問(wèn)題而飽受詬病，甚至一度出現(xiàn)廢除該罪名的呼聲。 第三部分，解決巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源不明罪適用困境的對(duì)策：首先，建立完善的財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度，具體而言，通過(guò)明確財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度的法律地位，構(gòu)建體系的官員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度，對(duì)申報(bào)工作實(shí)施有效監(jiān)管的具體措施來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)。其次，完善刑法的相關(guān)規(guī)定，包括降低入刑門(mén)檻，保證刑法體系的合理性，提高該罪的法定刑，增設(shè)量刑幅度，明確辦案標(biāo)準(zhǔn)（包括主體范圍與財(cái)產(chǎn)范圍）指導(dǎo)司法實(shí)踐。通過(guò)前期制度構(gòu)建，根源上彌補(bǔ)法理和制度缺陷，再通過(guò)完善現(xiàn)行法律，細(xì)化辦案標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，使得該罪擺脫適用困難的尷尬處境，避免修改罪名甚至廢除法律的極端手段，保障刑法的穩(wěn)定性和權(quán)威性。
[Abstract]:The legal provisions always bring the time brand of the period of formulation. With the development of the social economy, the deepening of the political change, the specific conditions of the formulation have changed. At this time, the law and the reality are unavoidable to conflict, so it is necessary to correct or make a reasonable explanation to adapt to the social life of the development and change. The crime of unidentified sources of property is a chapter of the crime of corruption and bribery for the first time in 1997. With the increasing rampant corruption and the deepening of the anti-corruption work, the relevant provisions of the crime show many defects in its application, especially the legal punishment than other corruption and the light of bribery. The urgent need to fight crime is raised. Therefore, the People's Republic of China criminal law amendment (seven), adopted by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress in 2009, has raised the legal penalty for the crime. According to the original provisions of the criminal law of China, the criminal offence should be sentenced to five years' imprisonment, which clearly stipulates that the maximum term of the crime is ten years. Although the amendment seven has raised the legal penalty to a certain extent, this way does not change the problem that the crime is low and the range of sentencing is simple in the one chapter of the crime of corruption and bribery. This has greatly influenced the system of punishment and can not solve the plight of the crime in its suitable use. This article discusses the dilemma of this crime. The concrete manifestation and the underlying causes of this phenomenon, and boldly explore countermeasures to seek solutions to the plight of application.
There are about thirty-five thousand words in this article. Besides the introduction, the main body is divided into three parts.
The first part, the plight of the crime is mainly manifested in the following: first, the judicial procedure of the crime is attached to the crime, and the initiation of the judicial procedure of the crime is generally associated with the lack of universality and independence in the process of determining the huge source of property in the process of the detection of other corruption and bribery crimes. Two is the difficulty of identifying the subject of the crime in practice. It is difficult and lack of unified standards to cause the judicial personnel to undertake specific cases to identify different subject areas, which violates the principle of legality and damages the authority and certainty of the criminal law. Three it is also difficult to identify the accomplices and confession of the crime and the special criminal constitution of the crime, which makes the identification of the accomplice and surrender certain special characteristics. Great disparity.
The second part, the cause of the plight of the crime of unidentified property: one is the legal reason, including the conflict of value selection of the crime, that is, the conflict of the value choice of justice and benefit; the dispute about the crime type of the crime is concentrated on the differences of the crime of holding and the inaction, and the nature of "cannot be explained". It is difficult, that is, whether it is a dispute about the constitutive elements of the crime. Two is the institutional cause, the lack of a perfect prepositional system - the property declaration system, and the lack of a perfect prepositional system, which makes the crime lack of necessary logical components as a crime of inaction; and there is no effective supervision to ensure the implementation of the property declaration system. Three is the establishment of the system. There are defects in the design of legal norms, such as the ambiguity in the description of the crime, the unclear definition of the scope of the subject, the simple and vague scope of the property; the reasonableness of the penalty threshold which is too high to destroy the criminal law system; the unreasonable penalty setting, including the lower legal punishment, the rough and simple lack of the scope of the sentencing, is precisely because of these reasons. There are many problems in the application of crime, which has been criticized and even called for the abolition of the charge.
The third part, the solution of the plight of the plight of the crime of unidentified property: first, to establish a perfect property declaration system, specifically, to establish the system of property declaration system by defining the legal status of the property declaration system, and to implement the concrete measures for the effective supervision of the declaration work. Secondly, to improve the relevant regulations of the criminal law. It includes reducing the threshold of entry to punishment, ensuring the rationality of the criminal law system, raising the legal punishment of the crime, adding the range of sentencing, making clear the standard of handling the case (including the scope of the subject and the scope of property) to guide the judicial practice. Through the construction of the earlier system, the legal and institutional defects are made up to the root of the system, and the crime standard is refined through the improvement of the current law, so that the crime is made to make the crime We should get rid of the awkward situation of applying difficulties and avoid modifying the charges or even abolishing the extreme means of the law so as to ensure the stability and authority of the criminal law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D924.392

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李潤(rùn)華;;巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源不明罪的現(xiàn)實(shí)困境及完善路徑[J];河北公安警察職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年02期

2 陳文權(quán);余雅潔;;官員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)公示制度研究態(tài)勢(shì)及其下一步[J];重慶社會(huì)科學(xué);2013年10期

3 李世偉;;淺析公務(wù)員財(cái)產(chǎn)公開(kāi)制度長(zhǎng)效機(jī)制的構(gòu)建[J];法制與社會(huì);2013年28期

4 向華萍;江明芙;丁新年;彭芹芹;;我國(guó)公務(wù)員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度——以其存在的缺陷為視角分析實(shí)踐的現(xiàn)狀[J];法制博覽(中旬刊);2014年01期

5 阮傳勝;巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源不明罪的立法缺陷及其修正[J];河北法學(xué);2004年06期

6 孔祥仁;美國(guó)財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度簡(jiǎn)介[J];中國(guó)監(jiān)察;2001年08期

7 王松麗;;巨額財(cái)產(chǎn)來(lái)源不明罪的矛盾與完善[J];江淮論壇;2007年04期

8 張曙光;;中國(guó)持有型犯罪的證明責(zé)任研究[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究導(dǎo)刊;2013年27期

9 趙盼盼;胡濤;;中國(guó)建立官員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度的困境及原因分析——基于公共選擇理論和“蹺板”模型的分析[J];牡丹江大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2013年11期

10 李洋;;論當(dāng)前我國(guó)公務(wù)員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度主客體范圍之完善[J];南華大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2013年05期

本文編號(hào)：1966551