故意犯中客观归责理论的主观性批判

Criticism of Subjectivity in Objective Imputation Theory for Intentional Crimes

故意犯与过失犯在存在构造与规范定位上存在差异,应当对客观归责理论在故意犯与过失犯中的适用进行区分讨论。客观归责理论无法为故意犯提供兼具逻辑一贯性与结论合理性的归责方案。客观归责的两大判断规则在故意犯中都无法真正维持其客观性:风险创设阶段的特别认知问题揭示出主观要素在风险判断中的必要性;风险实现阶段的因果流程偏离问题是一个主观归责问题,对于能否将偏离的结果归属于行为人的故意而言,客观归责是多余而无用的。应当全面放弃故意犯中的客观归责,转向主观归责。

There are differences in existence structure and normative position between intentional and negligent crimes,which suggests that the application of objective imputation theory should be separately discussed in intentional and negligent crimes.Objective imputation theory cannot provide consistent and reasonable imputation rules for intentional crimes.The two key rules of objective imputation theory,namely creation of risk and realization of risk,cannot truly maintain their objectivity in intentional crimes.The problem of"special knowledge"implies the necessity of subjective elements in risk judgement.The problem of deviation of the causal course is a problem of subjective imputation.Objective imputation is redundant and useless for whether the deviated result can be attributed to the actor.For intentional crimes,in place of objective imputation,subjective imputation thinking is supposed to be introduced.