论文部分内容阅读
绕开死刑既有学说抽象层面的存废之争,在现有的司法运作体制下,探究如何从实体法层面有效限制死刑适用无疑是务实性的做法。定位于行为人的人身危险性视角,先把犯罪行为人置于主体性地位审视再作死刑适用与否的判断,不仅与我国刑法对死刑限制性适用的初衷相契合,而且与刑罚思潮的主流价值相一致。人身危险性理论可以对死刑的司法适用进行双重限制,即一方面以侵犯生命权为坐标从死刑的外延上限制死刑的罪名种类,另一方面则以司法裁量中的量刑基准作为参照系予以死刑适用的限缩。
Bypassing the absurd controversy over the existentialism of the existing theory of the death penalty and exploring how to effectively restrict the application of the death penalty from the substantive law level is undoubtedly a pragmatic approach under the current judicial operation system. It is not only not only consistent with the original intention of our country’s criminal law to restrict the application of the death penalty but also to the mainstream of the criminal trend of thought when the criminal is placed in the subjective position to judge whether the death penalty is applicable or not, The same value. The theory of perilism can double the judicial application of the death penalty, that is, on the one hand, it limits the death penalty from the extension of the death penalty on the basis of the violation of the right to life, and on the other hand, it uses the sentencing benchmark in judicial discretion as the frame of reference Applicable limits.