本文選題：泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪 + 擴(kuò)大適用　； 參考：《河北經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的研究,是隨著《刑法修正案(九)(草案)》的公布而進(jìn)入廣泛的討論之中,特別是對增設(shè)泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的必要性呈現(xiàn)較為明顯的對立意見。可是,《刑法修正案(九)(草案)》幾易其稿,卻并未取消本罪。當(dāng)《刑法修正案(九)》頒布之后,泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪被正式確定下來。因此,學(xué)者們又開始將泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的研究角度由必要性轉(zhuǎn)為適用性。其實,在進(jìn)入自媒體時代后,隨著“輿論”“民意”“審判”三大元素之間不時產(chǎn)生激烈碰撞,司法審判活動與當(dāng)事人合法權(quán)益受到了強(qiáng)烈干擾,而對此又缺乏有效的規(guī)制,致使這一狀況越演越烈。為此,《刑法修正案(九)》積極回應(yīng)社會態(tài)勢,增設(shè)了泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪。應(yīng)當(dāng)說,這是刑事立法的一大進(jìn)步。不過,難以否認(rèn)的是,泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪自身罪狀模糊、實體法與程序法不協(xié)調(diào)、風(fēng)險防控機(jī)制缺乏等問題,比較容易造成本罪在司法實踐操作中被擴(kuò)大適用,甚至濫用。基于此,本文以論泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪為題,從泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的立法規(guī)制與司法實踐出發(fā),詳細(xì)展開論述。首先,文章分析了泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪中“泄露”“不公開案件”的含義,從而界定了泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的內(nèi)涵。并通過對泄露案件信息立法現(xiàn)狀與司法實踐的闡述,在一定程度上指出,增設(shè)泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪之前,現(xiàn)有的法律規(guī)制已難以約束司法實踐中頻發(fā)的泄露案件信息的事實,確有必要在刑法上增設(shè)泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪來震懾這一現(xiàn)狀。其次,文章從泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪犯罪構(gòu)成的四個方面入手,逐一論述了本罪的客體、客觀方面、主體、主觀方面。并指出,泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪侵犯的客體是司法機(jī)關(guān)正常的訴訟活動與訴訟中當(dāng)事人的合法權(quán)益,特別是當(dāng)事人在訴訟中的隱私權(quán)。在本罪的客觀方面,文章從犯罪行為、結(jié)果、因果關(guān)系三個方面對進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)闡述。對于本罪的犯罪主體,文章認(rèn)為本罪是特殊主體,是身份犯,且指出不同訴訟程序中出現(xiàn)的不同主體。在本罪的主觀方面,文章區(qū)分了本罪的故意形式,從直接故意與間接故意二個方面進(jìn)行了分析,并探討了立法者未將過失泄露不公開案件信息的行為納入刑法規(guī)制的原因。再次,文章著重論述了泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的認(rèn)定。文章分析了泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的未遂、罪與非罪等問題之后,選去在司法實踐中與本罪頗有爭議的其他罪名進(jìn)行一一分析,具體包括:泄露國家秘密罪、侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪、侵犯公民個人信息罪。在分析泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪與上述三個罪名的過程中,文章重點論述了其差異性,以加深對泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪與其他三個罪名的區(qū)分。最后,文章淺薄地指出泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪在立法上存在的一些問題,即罪狀敘述過于籠統(tǒng)、實體法與程序法自相矛盾等。針對這些問題,文章在分析國外關(guān)于泄露案件信息方面的三種管控模式之后,結(jié)合我國泄露不公開案件信息方面的司法現(xiàn)狀,不成熟地提出了一些建議性措施,以盼泄露不應(yīng)公開的案件信息罪的逐步完善。
[Abstract]:Should not leak on the crime case information disclosure, with the criminal law amendment (nine) "(Draft)" released into extensive discussion, especially the necessity of additional disclosure should not be the crime case information public presentation of the opposition is obvious. However, "criminal law amendment (nine) (Draft) > several drafts, but did not cancel the crime. When the" criminal law amendment (nine) "after the promulgation of disclosure should not crime case information disclosure was formally established. Therefore, scholars began to disclose should not study the crime case information disclosed by the necessity to apply. In fact, in the media era, with the" public opinion "and" public opinion "and" trial "between the three elements have from time to time the fierce collision, the legitimate rights and interests of judicial activities and the parties under strong interference, and the lack of effective regulation, the situation intensified. Therefore, "criminal law amendment (nine)" actively respond to the social situation, added the leak should not be the crime case information disclosure. It should be said that this is a great progress of criminal legislation. However, it is difficult to deny that disclosure should not be the crime case information disclosed their guilt is fuzzy, the substantive law and the procedural law is not coordinated the problem, lack of risk prevention and control mechanism, more likely to cause the crime in the judicial practice is applied, or even abuse. Based on this, this article on the disclosure shall not be disclosed as crime case information, starting from the legislation and judicial practice of the crime case information disclosure should not be disclosed, in detail discussed. Firstly, the article analysis of the disclosure should not open the case information in the crime of "leaked" "open case" meaning, which defines the connotation of crime should not leak information disclosure. And through the case of leakage of information legislation and judicial practice The paper points out that to a certain extent, before adding disclosure should not be the crime case information disclosure, the existing legal regulation has been difficult to restrain frequent judicial practice in the case of leakage of information that is necessary to add in the criminal law should not be leaked crime case information disclosure to deter this situation. Secondly, the four aspects of should not be leaked from the public information case of the crime of the author discusses the crime object, objective aspect, subject, subjective aspect. And pointed out that the object of the crime should not leak case information disclosure violations of the parties is the judicial authorities are often the proceedings in the litigation activities and the legitimate rights and interests, especially the privacy of people in the lawsuit. In the objective aspect of the crime, the criminal behavior from three aspects, the causal relations in detail. For the subject of the crime, the crime is the main special Body is the identity, and points out that different subjects of different procedure. In the subjective aspect of the crime, the article distinguishes the intent of this crime, from direct and indirect intentional two aspects of the analysis, and discusses the legislation will not open case information disclosure is not negligent behavior into the reason of criminal law again, this article mainly discusses the cognizance of the crime cases should not leak information disclosure. This paper analyzes the crime case information disclosure should not leak the attempt, after the crime and other issues, to the judicial practice in a dispute with the other charges for 11 analysis, including: the disclosure of state secrets and the crime of infringement of business secret, the infringement of citizens' personal information crime. In the analysis process should not leak public case information crime and the above-mentioned three charges, this paper discusses their differences, to add depth to not leak We should distinguish between crime case information disclosure and other three charges. Finally, the article points out that the leak should not be superficial problems of crime case information disclosure in the legislation, the crime description is too general, substantive law and procedural law contradictory and so on. To solve these problems, based on the analysis of abroad after three control mode leak case information, combined with China's judicial status case leaked non-public information, euripidesimmature puts forward some suggestions and measures for leakage should not be the crime case information public gradually improved.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D924.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 ;WR僭撼鰜鈮媎旃珪媹跴}劣商品和侵犯知媂u"k 行政哢p案件信息[J];中國法律;2013年06期

2 王成賓;;立功心切互揭底 揭出一個大團(tuán)伙[J];民主與法制;2011年07期

3 于成江;;刑事案件信息的類別及數(shù)據(jù)項[J];福建警察學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年06期

4 張蓉;;圍觀盛行,司法何以獨“善”其身?[J];民主與法制;2011年20期

5 ;最高檢察網(wǎng)驚現(xiàn)自己案件信息 女子險被騙[J];中國防偽報道;2014年06期

6 孫建國;;對建立我國網(wǎng)絡(luò)化執(zhí)行威懾系統(tǒng)機(jī)制的思考[J];法律適用;2008年Z1期

7 黃年;;解決“執(zhí)行難”的信息化策略[J];法制資訊;2008年10期

8 徐美君;;審前案件信息的傳播與控制——基于刑事訴訟的討論[J];政治與法律;2009年06期

9 ;十八\F三中全g后 多，

本文編號：1771323