本文選題：英國 + 恐怖主義��； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：不論從歷史上縱觀還是著眼于現(xiàn)實,英國的恐怖主義問題是眾多歐洲國家中最為顯著者。英國在長期與恐怖主義的對抗中形成了眾多反恐與治安部門。本文以反恐怖立法為研究對象,開篇首先對與恐怖主義有關(guān)的理論進行了簡單介紹,包括恐怖主義與恐怖主義犯罪、恐怖主義與人權(quán)保障、恐怖主義與刑事立法和英國反恐機構(gòu)的多元化。如此安排,意圖有二：一是在進行理論介紹的同時總結(jié)國內(nèi)學(xué)者在相關(guān)領(lǐng)域的研究成果,從而找到本文研究的切入點,明確研究價值所在；二是為下文英國反恐怖刑事立法的介紹建立參照系,便于提出相關(guān)問題和讀者閱讀。 第二章著眼于對英國反恐立法進行歷史考察。其反恐怖立法可以追溯到19世紀末期和20世紀初期。當時流行的立法思路是用刑法規(guī)制恐怖分子,并在普通刑法下對其進行起訴。這種思路被沿用到現(xiàn)在,如今在英國立法中,很大一部分的反恐立法仍舊采用刑事手段。第三章緊銜上文,說明進入本世紀后,英國首先制定了永久法案《2000年恐怖主義法案》,然后以頻繁的頻率對其進行修訂,分別出臺了《2001年反恐怖、犯罪與安全法案》、《2005年預(yù)防恐怖主義法案》、《2006年恐怖主義法案》、《2008年反恐怖法案》以及可以期待的《2011年恐怖分子財產(chǎn)凍結(jié)法案》。幾乎每一次大的恐怖襲擊就會催生一部法案,而政府已經(jīng)習慣于用大量的立法和罪名的增加安撫民眾的驚恐情緒和掩飾政府的無力姿態(tài)。與這一部部法案一同增加的不僅是定義的擴張和罪名的增加,還有長篇類卷的法院判例和人權(quán)質(zhì)疑。 第四章通過對比英國在21世紀前后的反恐立法和分析進入21世紀以后反恐立法的趨勢,提出本文的分析,認為英國的反恐立法不僅在數(shù)量上有了不斷增加的明顯趨勢,在反恐措施與手段方面也日趨多樣化�？植乐髁x定義的擴張帶來了國際與國內(nèi)的輿論壓力和司法挑戰(zhàn)。同時對恐怖主義的制裁已經(jīng)不像90年代及從前僅僅局限于刑事起訴,對恐怖主義的定義也加注了大量主觀主義因素。更明顯的趨勢是反恐立法日漸從刑事法律中脫離出來,反恐手段超越刑事領(lǐng)域,呈現(xiàn)刑事立法、財政控制、政府政策三管齊下的狀態(tài)。在進行各個方面的趨勢分析的同時,本文分別表達了對各個趨勢的看法。 針對以上分析,第五章從更加深入的角度提出我們從英國反恐怖刑事政策中可以吸取的經(jīng)驗和值得警惕的事宜。對待恐怖主義固然應(yīng)該多方面考慮,但是法學(xué)本身的體系化思維卻不能放棄,刑法和刑事訴訟的原則理念亦不能擱置。刑法打擊犯罪的手段多樣化,恐怖主義犯罪打擊手段中有些完全可以并入刑罰種類。對已實施的恐怖主義犯罪,打擊手段完全可以并入刑罰手段之中；對發(fā)出的恐怖主義威脅,根據(jù)刑法不對準備行為實施刑罰的基本原理,也應(yīng)排除出法案規(guī)范對象；某些財政手段可以以財產(chǎn)刑的方式加以深化；對恐怖主義犯罪的預(yù)防,也應(yīng)吸取對一般犯罪預(yù)防的經(jīng)驗,實施多部門合作,綜合治理。
[Abstract]:The British terrorism is the most prominent in many European countries, both in history and in view of reality. Britain has formed numerous anti-terrorism and public security departments in the long-term confrontation with terrorism. This article, taking anti terrorist legislation as the research object, begins with a brief introduction to the theory related to terrorism. It includes terrorism and terrorism crime, terrorism and human rights protection, terrorism and criminal legislation and the diversity of British counter-terrorism institutions. This arrangement is intended to be two: one is to summarize the research results of domestic scholars in the related fields and to find the breakthrough point of this study and to make clear research value. The two is to set up a reference frame for the introduction of the British anti terrorist criminal legislation, so as to facilitate relevant questions and readers' reading.
The second chapter focuses on the historical investigation of British counter-terrorism legislation. Its anti terrorist legislation can be traced back to the late nineteenth Century and the early twentieth Century. The popular legislative idea was to regulate terrorists by criminal law and to prosecute it under ordinary criminal law. This idea was used now, and now a large part of the British legislation is countered. The third chapter concludes that after this century, the British first enacted the <2000 terrorism act of the permanent bill, and then revised it with frequent frequencies, introducing the anti terrorism, crime and safety act of <2001, the terrorism prevention act of 2005, the terrorism act of <2006. The case, the anti terrorist act of <2008, and the <2011 terrorist property freeze bill that can be expected. Almost every major terrorist attack will lead to a bill, and the government is used to soothe the people's panic and disguise the government's inability to use a large number of legislation and charges. It is not only the expansion of definitions and accusations, but also the court precedents and human rights questions of long volumes.
In the fourth chapter, by comparing the anti terrorism legislation and analysis of Britain's anti-terrorism legislation before and after the twenty-first Century and the trend of anti-terrorism legislation after the twenty-first Century, this paper puts forward the analysis that the anti terrorist legislation in Britain not only has an increasing trend in quantity, but also diversities in the measures and means of counter-terrorism. The expansion of the definition of terrorism has brought the country. The pressure on public opinion and the challenge of the judiciary at the same time. At the same time, the sanctions on terrorism have not been limited to criminal prosecution only in 90s and before, and a large number of subjectivism factors are added to the definition of terrorism. The more obvious trend is that the legislation of counter-terrorism is gradually removed from the criminal law, and the means of counter-terrorism surpass the criminal field. The state of criminal legislation, financial control, and government policy. At the same time, this article expresses the views on each trend respectively.
In view of the above analysis, the fifth chapter puts forward the experience that we can draw from the criminal policy of Anti Terror in Britain and matters worthy of vigilance from a more deep perspective. Although it should be considered in many respects, the systematic thinking of law itself can not be abandoned, and the principle of criminal law and criminal procedure can not be put aside. The means of combating crime are diversified, and some of the means of combating terrorism can be fully incorporated into the category of punishment. For the terrorist crimes that have been carried out, the means of attack can be fully incorporated into the means of punishment; the threat to terrorism issued should also be ruled out according to the basic principles of the criminal law that does not carry out the punishment on the act of preparation. Some financial means can be deepened in the way of property punishment; the prevention of terrorism crime should also absorb the experience of prevention of general crime, implement multi department cooperation and comprehensive governance.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D956.1;DD914

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 夏勇,王焰;我國學(xué)界對恐怖主義犯罪定義研究的綜述[J];法商研究;2004年01期

2 付曉雅;;懲治、防范恐怖主義犯罪的反思與應(yīng)對[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年02期

3 秉直;建峰;;當代國際刑法與國際犯罪問題學(xué)術(shù)研討會綜述[J];法學(xué)家;2002年03期

4 王秀梅;;懲治恐怖主義犯罪中維護公共秩序與尊重人權(quán)的平衡[J];法學(xué)評論;2006年02期

5 杜邈;;預(yù)防和懲治恐怖主義:外國刑法立法的新趨勢[J];河北法學(xué);2009年09期

6 胡清照;打不打伊拉克?[J];南風窗;2002年06期

7 李希慧;徐立;;恐怖主義的概念、特征及反恐立法完善[J];人民檢察;2006年03期

8 汪力;李林;江海;;當代恐怖犯罪及刑法對策新論[J];西南大學(xué)學(xué)報(人文社會科學(xué)版);2006年01期

9 楊明杰;恐怖主義根源探析[J];現(xiàn)代國際關(guān)系;2002年01期

10 趙秉志;杜邈;;論刑法在反恐怖斗爭中的功能與局限[J];政治與法律;2009年11期

，

本文編號：2054159