【摘要】：從當(dāng)前為數(shù)不多的判例看,刑法第一百二十條之六新增的非法持有宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義、極端主義物品罪的罪名性質(zhì)尚不明朗。鑒于我國(guó)當(dāng)前立法及已有判例對(duì)恐怖主義和極端主義采取的區(qū)分立場(chǎng),非法持有宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義、極端主義物品罪宜解釋為選擇性罪名。因此,司法實(shí)踐中有必要區(qū)分宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義和宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品。對(duì)此應(yīng)當(dāng)根據(jù)罪刑法定原則以及相關(guān)司法解釋,對(duì)非法持有宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品罪的客觀構(gòu)成要件和主觀構(gòu)成要件進(jìn)行教義學(xué)分析。非法持有宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品的行為侵犯的法益為社會(huì)公共安全,即不特定或多數(shù)人的生命、身體的安全以及公眾生活的平穩(wěn)和安寧。以此區(qū)別于危害國(guó)家安全犯罪與妨害社會(huì)管理秩序犯罪。本罪的犯罪主體為一般主體。對(duì)非法持有行為的認(rèn)定要求行為人對(duì)宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品處于支配、控制狀態(tài),且具有不法性。其中,對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者持有行為的認(rèn)定需要在對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者類型化的基礎(chǔ)上分類討論。持有的對(duì)象為宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品,即以文字、圖片、視頻為載體和方式宣揚(yáng)極端主義理念或行為的物品。對(duì)于物品的“宣揚(yáng)極端主義性”的判斷不僅要從效果上進(jìn)行判斷,還要堅(jiān)持客觀性和關(guān)聯(lián)性的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。具體來(lái)說,對(duì)物品“宣揚(yáng)極端主義性”的判斷分為兩個(gè)階段,第一個(gè)階段以極端主義概念的三大核心要素,即價(jià)值理念的極端性、目的極端性和手段的暴力傾向性區(qū)分宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品與普通物品;第二個(gè)階段以恐怖主義區(qū)別于極端主義的獨(dú)特特征區(qū)分物品的宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義性與宣揚(yáng)極端主義性。此外,信息時(shí)代下對(duì)電子信息“物品化”的判斷會(huì)導(dǎo)致司法適用的差異。電子信息的“物品化”應(yīng)以“易于顯現(xiàn)并再現(xiàn)”為標(biāo)準(zhǔn),將部分電子信息認(rèn)定為“物品”,將特定電子信息納入“物品”的具體類型。本罪作為持有型犯罪只能由故意構(gòu)成,即明知是宣揚(yáng)極端主義的物品而持有,包括直接故意和間接故意。其中,對(duì)于物品宣揚(yáng)極端主義性明知的認(rèn)定,要以行為人實(shí)施的客觀行為為基礎(chǔ),結(jié)合其一貫表現(xiàn),具體行為、程度、手段、事后態(tài)度以及年齡、認(rèn)知和受教育程度、所從事的職業(yè)等綜合認(rèn)定。對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者主觀故意的認(rèn)定,則要結(jié)合服務(wù)提供者的服務(wù)性質(zhì)、盈利模式以及與用戶之間是否存在犯意聯(lián)絡(luò)等方面進(jìn)行認(rèn)定。對(duì)“情節(jié)嚴(yán)重”的解釋有助于有效界分宣揚(yáng)極端主義行為的行政責(zé)任與刑事責(zé)任。具體包括:非法持有宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品數(shù)量較大的;多次非法持有宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品的;行為人具有恐怖主義、極端主義傾向的;因極端主義、恐怖主義行為受過行政或刑事處罰的;以傳播為目的;以營(yíng)利為目的;國(guó)家工作人員非法持有宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品的;利用未成年人非法持有宣揚(yáng)極端主義物品的;以暴力手段抗拒行政執(zhí)法的;以“展示”的方式持有的;其他情節(jié)嚴(yán)重的行為。
[Abstract]:Judging from the current few cases, the nature of the crime of illegal possession and propaganda of terrorism and extremist goods added to Article 120 sexies of the Criminal Code is unclear. In view of China's current legislation and existing jurisprudence on terrorism and extremism, illegal possession and propaganda of terrorism, the crime of extremist goods should be interpreted as a selective crime. Therefore, in judicial practice, it is necessary to distinguish between the propaganda of terrorism and the promotion of extremist goods. According to the principle of legally prescribed punishment for a crime and the relevant judicial interpretation, the objective and subjective constitutive elements of the crime of illegal possession and propaganda of extremist goods should be analyzed by dogmatics. Illegal possession of extremist goods infringes on the social public safety, that is, the life of independent or majority people, the safety of the body, and the stability and tranquility of public life. In this way, it is distinguished from crimes against national security and crimes against social management order. The subject of the crime is the general subject. The identification of illegal possession requires the perpetrator to dominate, control and be illegal to propagate extremist goods. Among them, the identification of the holding behavior of network service providers needs to be classified and discussed on the basis of the classification of network service providers. The object is to promote extremist objects, that is, words, pictures, videos as carriers and ways to promote extremist ideas or acts. The judgment of "propagating extremism" should not only be judged from effect, but also adhere to the criterion of objectivity and relevance. Specifically, the judgment of "propagating extremism" is divided into two stages. The first stage is based on the three core elements of the concept of extremism, namely, the extreme nature of the concept of value. Aim the extreme and violent tendency of means distinguishes between the propaganda of extremist goods and ordinary goods; the second stage distinguishes between the propaganda of terrorism and the spread of extremism by the unique characteristics of terrorism and extremism. In addition, the judgment of electronic information "materialization" in the information age will lead to the difference of judicial application. The "objectification" of electronic information should be based on the criterion of "easy to manifest and reproduce", and some electronic information should be regarded as "objects", and specific electronic information should be brought into the specific types of "articles". As a possession crime, this crime can only be constituted by intent, that is, knowing that it is an object that propagates extremism, including direct intent and indirect intent. Among them, the identification of articles propagating extremist knowledge should be based on the objective behavior carried out by the perpetrator, combined with its consistent performance, concrete behavior, degree, means, afterwards attitude, age, cognition and educational level, The occupation and so on engaged in the comprehensive recognition. The subjective and intentional identification of the network service provider should be combined with the service nature of the service provider, the profit model and whether there is a criminal connection between the service provider and the user. The interpretation of "seriousness" helps to distinguish between administrative responsibility and criminal responsibility for propagating extremist acts. Specific include: illegal possession of extremist goods in a relatively large number; illegal possession of extremist goods for many times; perpetrators with terrorist and extremist tendencies; and extremism as a result of extremism, Having been subjected to administrative or criminal punishment for terrorist acts; for the purpose of dissemination; for the purpose of profit; for the illegal possession of extremist goods by State functionaries; or for the use of minors to illegally hold and propagate extremist goods; Resisting administrative law enforcement by violent means; held in a "show" manner; other serious acts.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D924.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 史志欽;;歐洲社會(huì)極端主義日益多面化[J];人民論壇;2017年01期

2 杜邈;;強(qiáng)制穿戴宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義、極端主義服飾、標(biāo)志罪的司法認(rèn)定[J];西部法學(xué)評(píng)論;2016年06期

3 趙軍;;法治語(yǔ)境下極端主義犯罪治理定量研究[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2016年06期

4 高小艷;;非法持有宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義、極端主義物品案的審查批捕要點(diǎn)——以郭某某案為例[J];中國(guó)檢察官;2016年22期

5 王良順;;宣揚(yáng)極端主義罪的基本構(gòu)成要素與司法適用探析[J];法學(xué)雜志;2016年10期

6 孫道萃;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)預(yù)備犯罪行為的法教義學(xué)分析[J];刑法論叢;2016年02期

7 初冬梅;;淺析美國(guó)反擊暴力極端主義政策[J];國(guó)際關(guān)系研究;2016年03期

8 包剛升;;極端主義的興起與西方世界的挑戰(zhàn)[J];文化縱橫;2016年03期

9 趙璨;;極端主義相關(guān)問題研究[J];湖南警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2016年03期

10 王新;;《刑法修正案(九)》第120條前置化規(guī)制的法理探析[J];北方法學(xué);2016年03期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 王愷豐;;往返顧盼:“情節(jié)嚴(yán)重”的規(guī)則尋找與司法認(rèn)定[A];建設(shè)公平正義社會(huì)與刑事法律適用問題研究-全國(guó)法院第24屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄏ聝?cè)）[C];2012年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 周新;淫穢電子信息犯罪研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2014年

2 黃琰;信息刑法基本問題研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2012年

3 劉亞娜;持有型犯罪的系統(tǒng)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2005年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 丁云;論宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義、極端主義、煽動(dòng)實(shí)施恐怖活動(dòng)罪[D];新疆大學(xué);2016年

2 沈yN雪;論宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義、極端主義、煽動(dòng)實(shí)施恐怖活動(dòng)罪[D];華東政法大學(xué);2016年

3 黃波;持有偽造發(fā)票犯罪研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

4 于瑩;持有型犯罪主觀方面研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

5 游華平;選擇性罪名的多維解讀[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2012年

6 林霖;非法獲取公民個(gè)人信息罪“情節(jié)嚴(yán)重”的認(rèn)定[D];南昌大學(xué);2011年

7 宋寅亮;網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播淫穢物品犯罪認(rèn)定研究[D];湖南大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2161194