论持有的性质

On Nature of Possession

“无行为则无犯罪”是刑法理论的基石,在此预设下持有的行为性似乎不证自明,然而在刑法理论上对持有性犯罪的行为方式到底应归属于作为还是不作为,抑或是第三行为方式则争议较大。传统刑法中以规范说作为划分“作为”与“不作为”的标准,持有自然没有作为第三行为方式存在的余地。但是以社会行为论作为基础的规范说因缺乏行为的生物学意义,其缺陷也是明显的,所以应当用规范论和存在论相结合的混合说来作为危害行为分类的标准。在自然意义上持有显然不同于作为和不作为,所以应当是第三行为方式。

The theories of criminal law are built on the foundation of ＂no conduct, no crime＂, so based on that premise there is seemingly no need to verify the action of possession. But a heated argument on this classification of crimes in the theory of criminal jurisprudence is whether the conduct pattern of them is action, omission or a third pattern. The doctrine of Norm is the dividing criterion between act and omission, of which act violates criminal rules for ban and omission violates criminal law for order. Possession as the third type of conduct cannot be tenable no matter in formal logic or in fact. Possession is different from act and omission in nature , so it should be the third pattern of conduct.