我国的犯罪构成体系及其完善路径

The System of Crime Constitution of China and the Completion Approach

当今世界最有代表性的三种犯罪构成(或犯罪成立)体系,各有自身的优势和缺陷,很难说哪种类型的体系更好。我国的“四要件体系”层次清晰、简洁明了,便于司法人员掌握和适用刑法的规定来认定犯罪;但将犯罪客体作为犯罪构成的要件不具有科学合理性,没有为排除犯罪成立的事由设定专门的出罪出口(或通道)也是一大缺陷。对此,有必要作两点改进:一是将传统“四要件体系”中的犯罪客观方面、犯罪主观方面和犯罪主体这三方面的要件,作为犯罪成立的一般条件(或积极要件);二是把排除犯罪性事由作为否定犯罪成立的特殊情形(或消极要件)。“重构论”者提出的从根本上否定“四要件体系”的论点不具有合理性。

The three most representative crime constitution(or crime establishment)systems in the world today have their own advantages and defects.It is hard to say which one is better.China’s“four elements crime constitution”has a concise and clear structure,and it can be well mastered by judicial personnel to apply the criminal law to confrm crimes.But it’s unreasonable to regard the object of crime as an element of crime constitution.Also,it’s a major defect that there is no special exit(or channel)for decriminalization causes.In this regard,it is necessary to make two improvements.The first to take the objective aspect of crime,the subjective aspect of crime and the subject of crime in the traditional“four elements crime constitution”as the general elements(or positive elements)for crime establishment.Secondly,the exclusion of criminal causes is regarded as the special elements(or negative elements)for decriminalization.Main reasons of the theory of reconstruction for fundamentally rejecting“four elements crime constitution”do not hold.