论文部分内容阅读
累犯从严作为各国通行的量刑实践,其正当性需要被充分证明。许多学者都认为功利主义能为累犯从严正当性提供充分的理论根据。他们主张,累犯从严之所以具有正当性,是因为累犯从严作为一种手段,可以通过改造、威慑和隔离这三种途径,最终实现减少重新犯罪的目的。然而,本文认为,累犯从严的功利主义正当性论证仅能在应然层面获得逻辑上的自洽,在实然层面上却难以成立:一方面,累犯从严功利主义正当性缺乏经验的有效支持。多项实证研究表明,累犯从严并不能有效地改造、威慑、隔离犯罪人,其在减少重新犯罪方面并不能发挥预期的作用。另一方面,累犯从严功利主义正当性在伦理上也存在极大的危险倾向,可能导致国家权力无限扩张,公民权利受到践踏,最终有违公平正义。因此,功利主义并不能为累犯从严提供充分的正当性根据。
The integrity of recidivism as a sentencing practice prevailing in all countries, its legitimacy needs to be fully proven. Many scholars believe that utilitarianism can provide sufficient theoretical basis for the integrity of recidivism. They argue that the reason why the recidivism is strictly justified is that the recidivist’s strictness can be used as a means to ultimately reduce the crime of recidivism by transforming, deterring and isolating these three ways. However, this article argues that the strictly utilitarian legitimacy of recidivism can only be logically self-consistent at its own right, but hard to set up at the level of reality: on the one hand, the validity of recalcitrant strict utilitarian legitimacy is not valid stand by. A number of empirical studies have shown that the strict recidivism does not effectively transform, deter and segregate criminals and does not play its intended role in reducing recidivism. On the other hand, there is also a great ethical ethics of recalcitrant strict utilitarian legitimacy, which may lead to the unlimited expansion of state power, the violation of civil rights and ultimately the fair and justice. Therefore, utilitarianism can not provide a sufficient justification for recidivism.