本文選題：終身監(jiān)禁 + 貪污受賄罪��； 參考：《安徽財經大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：終身監(jiān)禁在國內外刑法學界都沒有一個統(tǒng)一確切的概念,通說認為,它是將犯罪分子羈押于特定場所并剝奪終身自由的刑罰,其本質是自由刑。終身監(jiān)禁作為死刑的替代措施,最先由意大利刑事古典學派創(chuàng)始人貝卡利亞提出,其在《論犯罪與刑罰》一書中,批判了死刑制度,主張以終身監(jiān)禁作為死刑的替代措施。經過一百多年的發(fā)展,終身監(jiān)禁制度在西方乃至整個世界范圍內都得到了廣泛的使用。而我國刑罰發(fā)展史上并沒有關于終身監(jiān)禁的相關規(guī)定,終身監(jiān)禁制度是作為一種舶來品傳入我國,并引起我國學者的廣泛關注,以往對于終身監(jiān)禁的討論多是基于替代死刑的立場。我國于2015年11月1日施行了《刑法修正案(九)》,其中第44條第4款創(chuàng)造性地增設了終身監(jiān)禁制度,至此我國以法律的形式明確了終身監(jiān)禁的地位。就目前立法來看,我國的終身監(jiān)禁并非一種新的刑罰種類,亦非死刑的替代措施或者廢止死刑的過渡措施,而是僅適用于被判處死刑緩期執(zhí)行的重特大貪污受賄犯罪分子在依法減為無期徒刑后的一種特殊的刑罰執(zhí)行措施。終身監(jiān)禁作為一項全新的制度,在我國的司法實踐中存在著積極的價值。它不僅有利于彌補貪污受賄犯罪“死刑偏重、生刑偏輕”的刑罰結構缺陷,也有利于嚴厲打擊腐敗犯罪規(guī)范權力的運行和避免“錯殺、誤殺”現(xiàn)象的發(fā)生,更能切實有效的減少死刑的實際運用,同時也為我國的涉外司法協(xié)助和死刑的廢除提供新動力。然而任何一項制度都不可能十全十美,因此終身監(jiān)禁制度不可避免的存在各種不足。首先從立法上看,《刑法修正案(九)》所規(guī)定的適用標準不夠明確,如犯罪數額標準不明確、犯罪情節(jié)過于模糊抽象等。而且我國的終身監(jiān)禁制度缺乏回歸社會的機制,并只適用于特定貪污受賄犯罪,適用范圍過于狹窄。其次從司法上看,由于服刑人員看不到重獲自由的機會,而不認真接受教育改造,甚至采取一系列極端行為,大大增加了監(jiān)獄監(jiān)管執(zhí)行的壓力。同時隨著終身監(jiān)禁制度的運行,監(jiān)獄受刑者老年化問題也將越來越突出。而且監(jiān)獄為實現(xiàn)對服刑人員的教育改造,需投入大量的國家資源,增加了監(jiān)獄的成本。這就需要我們立足我國具體國情,并借鑒歐美國家關于終身監(jiān)禁的優(yōu)秀經驗,為我國的終身監(jiān)禁的實施提出自己的完善建議。首先在立法上,應進一步明確終身監(jiān)禁的適用標準,完善終身監(jiān)禁的救濟途徑,并在嚴格限制死刑適用的基礎上適度擴大終身監(jiān)禁的適用范圍。其次在司法上,我國需要完善監(jiān)獄的監(jiān)督管理體系以及老年服刑人員的保障措施,同時也需優(yōu)化監(jiān)獄節(jié)約成本的方式。只有這樣終身監(jiān)禁在今后的司法實踐中才能最大限度發(fā)揮其所應有的積極價值,促進我國的刑罰制度改革以及法治化建設。
[Abstract]:Life imprisonment does not have a unified and precise concept in the field of criminal law at home and abroad. It is generally believed that life imprisonment is the penalty of detaining criminals in a specific place and depriving them of their freedom for life, and its essence is free punishment. Life imprisonment, as an alternative measure to the death penalty, was first put forward by Bercaria, the founder of Italian classical criminal school. In his book on Crime and penalty, he criticized the death penalty system and advocated that life imprisonment should be taken as the alternative measure of death penalty. After more than 100 years of development, life imprisonment system has been widely used in the West and the whole world. However, there are no relevant provisions on life imprisonment in the history of penalty development in China. The system of life imprisonment is introduced into our country as an import, and has aroused the widespread concern of Chinese scholars. Previous discussions on life imprisonment have been based on a position of alternative to the death penalty. Our country carried out the Criminal Law Amendment (9) on November 1, 2015, in which Article 44, paragraph 4, creatively added the system of life imprisonment, thus our country defined the status of life imprisonment in the form of law. As far as the current legislation is concerned, life imprisonment in China is not a new type of penalty, nor is it an alternative to the death penalty or a transitional measure to abolish the death penalty. It is only a special measure of execution after the penalty is commuted to life imprisonment for the extremely serious corruption and bribery criminals who have been sentenced to death penalty suspended. As a new system, life imprisonment has positive value in the judicial practice of our country. It is not only helpful to remedy the penalty structure defects of corruption and bribery crime, but also to crack down on the operation of the power of corruption crime and to avoid the phenomenon of "wrong killing, wrong killing". It can effectively reduce the actual use of the death penalty, but also provide a new impetus for foreign judicial assistance and the abolition of the death penalty. However, any system can not be perfect, so life imprisonment system inevitably has a variety of shortcomings. First of all, from the legislative point of view, the applicable standards stipulated in the Criminal Law Amendment (9) are not clear enough, for example, the standard of the amount of crime is not clear, the circumstances of the crime are too vague and abstract, and so on. Moreover, the system of life imprisonment in our country lacks the mechanism of returning to society, and it is only applicable to certain crimes of corruption and bribery, and the scope of application is too narrow. Secondly, from the judicial point of view, because the prisoners do not see the opportunity to regain their freedom, they do not seriously receive educational reform, and even take a series of extreme acts, which greatly increases the pressure of prison supervision and enforcement. At the same time, with the operation of life imprisonment system, the aging of prison inmates will become more and more prominent. In order to realize the educational reform of the prisoners, the prison needs a lot of national resources, which increases the cost of the prison. This requires us to base ourselves on the specific conditions of our country and draw lessons from the excellent experience of European and American countries on life imprisonment, and put forward our own perfect suggestions for the implementation of life imprisonment in our country. First of all, in legislation, we should further clarify the applicable standards of life imprisonment, improve the remedy of life imprisonment, and appropriately expand the scope of life imprisonment on the basis of strict restrictions on the application of the death penalty. Secondly, in the judicial aspect, our country needs to perfect the prison supervision and management system and the safeguard measure of the aged prisoners, and also needs to optimize the way of the prison cost saving. Only in the future judicial practice can life imprisonment give full play to its positive value and promote the reform of the penal system and the construction of the rule of law in our country.
【學位授予單位】：安徽財經大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D924.1

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 黃京平;;終身監(jiān)禁的法律定位與司法適用[J];北京聯(lián)合大學學報(人文社會科學版);2015年04期

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 張新u&;終身自由刑替代死刑制度研究[D];吉林大學;2013年

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 卞燕飛;貪污罪、受賄罪終身監(jiān)禁制度研究[D];湘潭大學;2016年

2 嚴玉婷;終身監(jiān)禁制度的探究[D];吉林大學;2016年

，

本文編號：2019092