本文選題：生態(tài)法益 + 外來物種入侵罪��； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2015年博士論文

【摘要】：隨著人類能力的不斷提升,我們似乎已經(jīng)戰(zhàn)無不勝、攻無不克,然而在人類開始為自己的“成績”而欣喜的時(shí)候,自然開始了報(bào)復(fù),人類開始生活在自己營造的環(huán)境危險(xiǎn)社會(huì)之中。因此,環(huán)境問題逐漸成為21世紀(jì)人類關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn),完善環(huán)境刑事立法也隨之成為我國立法之重點(diǎn)。然而,我國現(xiàn)行環(huán)境犯罪保護(hù)的目標(biāo)并不明確,在人身法益、財(cái)產(chǎn)法益、秩序法益與生態(tài)法益之間左右游移,造成環(huán)境犯罪立法目的的模糊,對于生態(tài)環(huán)境的保護(hù)十分不利。本文主張?jiān)谒姆N法益之間,生態(tài)法益應(yīng)該成為環(huán)境犯罪保護(hù)的主要目標(biāo),其余三種法益則是環(huán)境犯罪保護(hù)的次要目標(biāo)。以此為主題思想,本文將分為五個(gè)部分對以生態(tài)法益保護(hù)為中心的環(huán)境犯罪立法完善進(jìn)行研究。本文以“利益”為出發(fā)點(diǎn),利益的本意是需要的滿足,而最低的需要應(yīng)是生存,它的表現(xiàn)就是生命,由此將非生物體和后代人的利益主體資格排除。生態(tài)利益是生態(tài)法益的上位概念,本文通過對生態(tài)利益概念的梳理,得出生態(tài)利益的主體是人類及非人類生物體。本文以“法益”為出發(fā)點(diǎn),通過法益與利益關(guān)系的辨析得出生態(tài)法益的主體是人的觀點(diǎn),排除了非人類生物體生態(tài)法益主體的資格。本文以“生態(tài)”為出發(fā)點(diǎn),通過對生態(tài)系統(tǒng)和環(huán)境資源的比較,指出環(huán)境資源的經(jīng)濟(jì)屬性及其難以跳脫古典人類中心主義泥潭的先天缺陷,而生態(tài)系統(tǒng)強(qiáng)調(diào)整體性及其自然科學(xué)研究基礎(chǔ)之雄厚的特征,得出生態(tài)系統(tǒng)作為生態(tài)法益客體更為適宜的結(jié)論。由此,生態(tài)法益的概念應(yīng)當(dāng)界定為:法所保護(hù)的,生態(tài)系統(tǒng)提供給人類的,脫離了人類的人身、財(cái)產(chǎn)、秩序法益和環(huán)境精神利益而獨(dú)立存在的,對人類的生存和發(fā)展具有基礎(chǔ)支持和決定作用的利益。在環(huán)境犯罪以生態(tài)法益保護(hù)為中心的合理性討論中,筆者提出生態(tài)法益中心論的觀點(diǎn),這一點(diǎn)源于生態(tài)利益本身所具有的特殊性:不易恢復(fù)性、公共性和跨國影響性。本文借用經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)中的“無差異”標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對具有不易恢復(fù)性的生態(tài)法益損害完美賠償?shù)牟豢尚羞M(jìn)行論證,通過生態(tài)利益損害所具有的公共性論證其所具有的嚴(yán)重社會(huì)危害性,由生態(tài)利益損害所具有的跨國影響性引出環(huán)境犯罪的懲治并非某一國家自己的事務(wù),而是整個(gè)世界的共同事業(yè),我國環(huán)境刑法應(yīng)與世界先進(jìn)國家的環(huán)境刑法相接軌,由此得出我國刑法介入生態(tài)法益保護(hù)的必要性。在此基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合我國現(xiàn)行環(huán)境刑法以人類傳統(tǒng)法益為保護(hù)中心的表現(xiàn),本文進(jìn)一步論證生態(tài)法益是環(huán)境犯罪主要客體、生態(tài)法益損害是環(huán)境犯罪與其他類罪的最本質(zhì)區(qū)別、以生態(tài)法益保護(hù)為中心能夠有效遏制環(huán)境犯罪的發(fā)生等觀點(diǎn)。我國環(huán)境刑法中雖有生態(tài)法益保護(hù)的蒙醒和跡象可尋,但以生態(tài)法益保護(hù)為中心對我國環(huán)境犯罪刑事立法進(jìn)行反思,會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)我國環(huán)境犯罪存在三方面不足。對生態(tài)法益保護(hù)不全面表現(xiàn)為缺少對生態(tài)脆弱區(qū)和濕地生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的保護(hù)、非法占用農(nóng)用地罪的條文中“數(shù)量較大”與“造成農(nóng)用地大量毀壞”之間的重復(fù)與表述不當(dāng)和危害林木類犯罪社會(huì)危害性的度量以林木的立木蓄積為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的財(cái)產(chǎn)傾向。對生態(tài)法益保護(hù)深度不足主要體現(xiàn)在對生物多樣性的保護(hù)僅停留在對物種多樣性的保護(hù)層面,而且對物種多樣性的保護(hù)也不夠周延,具體表現(xiàn)為缺少外來物種入侵罪的設(shè)置、缺少對生命運(yùn)行整體過程的考慮、對純正生態(tài)法益損害的入罪考量不足。環(huán)境犯罪刑事責(zé)任設(shè)置對生態(tài)法益的保護(hù)不足表現(xiàn)為環(huán)境犯罪與相關(guān)其他犯罪的刑罰幅度設(shè)置存在罪刑不均衡現(xiàn)象以及對生態(tài)法益損害行為缺乏直接以恢復(fù)生態(tài)為目的刑事責(zé)任承擔(dān)方式。無論是罪名的增加還是刑法條文及解釋的調(diào)整都應(yīng)以環(huán)境犯罪的獨(dú)立成章為基礎(chǔ),與此同時(shí),本文通過對生態(tài)法益與其余三種法益之間的沖突與位階的討論,得出其所處位置應(yīng)該是侵犯公民人身權(quán)利、民主權(quán)利罪與侵犯財(cái)產(chǎn)罪兩章之間。在具體罪名的增加與法文的調(diào)整方面,應(yīng)該給予重點(diǎn)生態(tài)脆弱區(qū)以與國家級自然保護(hù)區(qū)和自然保護(hù)區(qū)核心區(qū)同等的保護(hù),通過解釋的方法將濕地納入非法占用農(nóng)用地罪的犯罪對象中,增設(shè)以保護(hù)生物多樣性為目標(biāo)的外來物種入侵罪,危害自然保護(hù)區(qū)罪和違法獲取、毀壞珍貴、瀕危野生動(dòng)物蛋卵罪。在刑罰方面,針對司法實(shí)踐中涌現(xiàn)的以恢復(fù)生態(tài)為目的的裁判,通過對理論學(xué)說的比較,本文主張?jiān)诒慌刑幑苤�、宣告緩刑以及被裁定假釋的環(huán)境犯罪人適用社區(qū)矯正中增加以恢復(fù)生態(tài)為內(nèi)容的社會(huì)服務(wù)令制度。我國環(huán)境犯罪現(xiàn)有量化標(biāo)準(zhǔn)無法滿足生態(tài)法益保護(hù)的需要,對生態(tài)法益損害通過鑒定評估的方式進(jìn)行量化是克服生態(tài)法益損害模糊性的唯一途徑。對生態(tài)法益損害量化評估進(jìn)而納入法律規(guī)制范疇的方法已經(jīng)在美國和歐盟得到適用并取得了不菲的成果,廣受各國推崇和借鑒。我國目前適用這種方法對生態(tài)法益進(jìn)行量化所具有的基礎(chǔ)包括我國生態(tài)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)學(xué)者已經(jīng)擁有對生態(tài)價(jià)值進(jìn)行評估的技術(shù),我國刑法內(nèi)和刑法外已經(jīng)具備一定程度的規(guī)范基礎(chǔ),在司法鑒定上已經(jīng)具備一定的操作基礎(chǔ),但是雖存在這些基礎(chǔ),真正做到生態(tài)法益損害量化納入刑法規(guī)制還需要更加充足的準(zhǔn)備。本文進(jìn)一步對污染環(huán)境罪、擅自進(jìn)口固體廢物罪、非法采礦罪和破壞性采礦罪的立法進(jìn)行了與之相契合的調(diào)整,并主張?jiān)谏鷳B(tài)法益損害入罪標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的設(shè)計(jì)中采用浮動(dòng)區(qū)間的方式以化解環(huán)境容量的地域性與生態(tài)法益損害定罪數(shù)額的確定性之間的矛盾。
[Abstract]:With the continuous improvement of human ability, we seem to have been invincible and invincible. However, when human beings begin to retaliate for their "achievements", we naturally begin to retaliate, and human beings begin to live in a dangerous environment of their own environment. Therefore, environmental questions have gradually become the focus of human concern in the twenty-first Century, and the environment is perfect. The criminal legislation is also the focus of our country's legislation. However, the objective of our current environmental crime protection is not clear. It moves between the personal legal benefit, the property legal interest, the legal interest of the order and the ecological legal interest, which makes the legislative purpose of the environmental crime blurred and the protection of the ecological environment very bad. This article advocates between the four kinds of legal interests, The ecological benefits should be the main goal of environmental crime protection, and the other three kinds of legal benefits are the secondary goal of environmental crime protection. As the theme, this article will be divided into five parts to study the improvement of environmental crime legislation centered on the protection of ecological legal interest. This article is based on the "interest" as the starting point, and the intention of the interest is needed. Satisfaction, and the minimum need should be survival, its performance is life, which excludes the subject qualification of non living and descendants. Ecological interests are the epistatic concept of ecological benefits. By combing the concept of ecological interests, the main body of ecological interests is human and non human organisms. This article is based on the "legal benefit". Point, through the analysis of the relationship between legal interest and interest, the main body of ecological legal benefit is human's viewpoint, and the qualification of non human organism ecological legal benefit subject is excluded. This article takes "ecology" as the starting point, and points out the economic attribute of environmental resources and it is difficult to jump out of the classical anthropocentrism mire through the comparison of ecological system and environmental resources. And the ecological system emphasizes the solid characteristics of the integrity and the foundation of the natural scientific research, and draws the conclusion that the ecosystem is more suitable as the object of the ecological legal benefit. Therefore, the concept of ecological legal interest should be defined as: the law is protected by the law and the ecosystem is provided to human beings, which are separated from the human body, property, order legal benefits and the benefits of human beings. In the discussion of the rationality of environmental crime centered on the protection of ecological legal benefits, the author puts forward the viewpoint of the ecologic legal interest center theory, which is derived from the particularity of the ecological interests, which is not easy to recover and public. By borrowing the "no difference" standard in economics, this paper demonstrates the infeasibility of damaging the perfect compensation for the ecological benefits that are not easy to recover, and demonstrates the serious social harmfulness by the public nature of the ecological benefit damage, which leads to the environment of transnational influence caused by the damage of ecological benefits. The punishment of the crime is not a country's own affairs, but the common cause of the whole world. The environmental criminal law of our country should be connected with the environmental criminal law of the world's advanced countries. Thus, the necessity of the protection of the ecological legal interest in the criminal law of our country is drawn. On the basis of this, it combines the current environmental criminal law of our country to the protection of the human traditional legal interest as the protection center. At present, this article further demonstrates that ecological legal interest is the main object of environmental crime. The damage of ecological legal interest is the most essential difference between environmental crime and other types of crime. The ecological legal interest protection can effectively restrain the occurrence of environmental crime. In our environmental criminal law, although there are awakening and signs of ecological legal interest protection, the ecological legal interest is beneficial to the ecological legal interest. The protection is the center to reflect on the criminal legislation of environmental crime in China. There will be three deficiencies in the environmental crime in China. The protection of ecological legal benefit is not fully manifested as the lack of the protection of the ecological fragile area and the wetland ecosystem. The provisions of the crime of illegal occupation of agricultural land are "large in quantity" and "caused by a large number of agricultural land destruction". The measure of the improper repetition and expression and the harm to the social harmfulness of the forest type crime is the standard property tendencies of the trees. The protection depth of the ecological benefits is mainly reflected in the protection of biodiversity only on the protection level of the species diversity, and the protection of the species diversity is not enough. The body is lacking in the crime of alien species invasion, lack of consideration of the whole process of life and the inadequacy of the crime of pure ecological legal benefit damage. The lack of protection of the ecological legal interest by setting up the criminal responsibility of environmental crime shows that there is no balance between the crime and punishment of the environmental crime and other related crimes. No matter the increase in the crime, the provisions of the criminal law and the adjustment of the interpretation should be based on the independent chapter of the environmental crime, and at the same time, the article through the discussion of the conflict and the rank between the ecological benefits and the other three kinds of legal benefits. The position should be between the two chapters of the infringement of citizen's personal rights, the crime of democratic rights and the crime of violating property. In terms of specific charges and the adjustment of French, the key ecological fragile areas should be given the same protection as the National Nature Reserve and the core of the nature reserve. In the crime object of land use crime, the crime of invasion of alien species, which is aimed at protecting biological diversity, endangering the crime and illegal acquisition of natural reserves, destroying precious and endangered wild animals egg eggs. In the aspect of punishment, the referee that emerges to restore ecology in judicial practice, through the comparison of theory and theory, is advocated in this paper. The environmental criminals who are sentenced to control, declaring probation and adjudication are applicable to the social service order of community correction in the community correction. The existing quantitative standards of environmental crime in our country can not meet the needs of ecological legal benefit protection, and the ecological law benefit damage through the evaluation method is quantified to overcome the ecological law. The only way to damage the fuzziness of interest is that the quantitative assessment of the damage to the ecological benefits has been applied in the United States and the European Union, which has been widely praised and used for reference by all countries. The basis of the application of this method to the quantification of ecological benefits includes the ecological economy of our country. Scholars have already had the technology to evaluate the ecological value. In our country, the criminal law and the criminal law have a certain standard basis, and have certain operational basis in the judicial identification. But although there are these foundations, it is necessary to make the quantification of the damage quantification of the ecological benefits into the criminal law more sufficient preparation. In one step, the crime of polluting the environment, the crime of importing solid waste without authorization, the crime of illegal mining and the crime of destructive mining have been adjusted in conjunction with it, and the floating interval is adopted in the design of the standards for the offense of ecological benefits to resolve the certainty of the locality of the environmental capacity and the certainty of the amount of the damage to the ecological legal interest. The contradiction.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D924.3
，

本文編號：1827537