刑法適用應遵循憲法的基本精神——以“尋釁滋事”的司法解釋為例
發(fā)布時間:2018-09-12 09:18
【摘要】:國家的基本職能是通過其所壟斷的合法暴力以維護公共安全、控制私人暴力,保證自由言論和民主選舉得以和平進行,從而使國家得到良性和理性的治理。國家力量應對思想和言論給予必要的包容,除非言論會產(chǎn)生暴力沖突等緊迫與嚴重的現(xiàn)實危險。為防止尋釁滋事罪成為"口袋罪",我們應嚴格界定"公共場所秩序嚴重混亂"等法律要件。只有當言論確實嚴重擾亂了現(xiàn)實公共場所的秩序時,相關行為才可能構(gòu)成"尋釁滋事";而要構(gòu)成"嚴重混亂",言論所產(chǎn)生的危害必須是清楚和即刻發(fā)生的。
[Abstract]:The basic function of the state is to maintain public security, control private violence and ensure the peaceful conduct of free speech and democratic elections through its monopoly of legal violence, thus enabling the country to have sound and rational governance. National forces should give the necessary tolerance to ideas and words unless they create immediate and serious real dangers such as violent conflict. In order to prevent the crime of provoking trouble from becoming "pocket crime", we should strictly define the legal elements such as "serious disorder in public places". Only when the speech seriously disturbs the order of the real public places can the relevant behavior constitute a "provocation and trouble". To constitute a "serious disorder", the harm caused by the speech must be clear and immediate.
【作者單位】: 北京大學憲法與行政法研究中心;
【分類號】:D924.3
本文編號:2238571
[Abstract]:The basic function of the state is to maintain public security, control private violence and ensure the peaceful conduct of free speech and democratic elections through its monopoly of legal violence, thus enabling the country to have sound and rational governance. National forces should give the necessary tolerance to ideas and words unless they create immediate and serious real dangers such as violent conflict. In order to prevent the crime of provoking trouble from becoming "pocket crime", we should strictly define the legal elements such as "serious disorder in public places". Only when the speech seriously disturbs the order of the real public places can the relevant behavior constitute a "provocation and trouble". To constitute a "serious disorder", the harm caused by the speech must be clear and immediate.
【作者單位】: 北京大學憲法與行政法研究中心;
【分類號】:D924.3
【相似文獻】
相關期刊論文 前2條
1 李會彬;;網(wǎng)絡言論的刑法規(guī)制范圍——兼評兩高《關于辦理利用信息網(wǎng)絡實施誹謗等刑事案件適用法律若干問題的解釋》[J];法治研究;2014年03期
2 ;[J];;年期
相關重要報紙文章 前6條
1 ;厘清網(wǎng)絡言論的法律邊界[N];第一財經(jīng)日報;2013年
2 本報記者 李恩樹;網(wǎng)絡言論宜采取事后追懲制[N];法制日報;2012年
3 雷風;網(wǎng)絡言論不能挑戰(zhàn)法律[N];法制日報;2013年
4 早報記者 黃芳;兩高劃定網(wǎng)絡言論法律邊界[N];東方早報;2013年
5 記者 袁定波;厘清網(wǎng)絡言論法律邊界[N];法制日報;2013年
6 本社記者 葉俊;厘清網(wǎng)絡言論的法律邊界[N];民主與法制時報;2013年
相關碩士學位論文 前2條
1 劉亞飛;論網(wǎng)絡言論的刑法規(guī)制及邊界[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學;2014年
2 熊鷹;網(wǎng)絡言論侵權行為入罪問題研究[D];湘潭大學;2009年
,本文編號:2238571
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2238571.html