论犯罪分层标准

On Standards of Criminal Typology

犯罪分层标准可分为形式标准和实体标准两类。形式标准根据法定刑罚轻重对犯罪进行分层,其优点是直观、明确,缺陷是以立法者标准代替所有标准、缺乏逻辑性。实体标准根据犯罪本身的严重程度对犯罪进行分层。实体标准有三个视角,即国家视角、专家视角和民众视角,国家视角表达立法者对犯罪严重程度的认识和评价,专家视角表达刑事法学者对犯罪严重程度的理性认识,民众视角表达普通民众对犯罪严重程度的感受和评价。三个视角的犯罪分层结果存在差异,需要通过深入分析与多边讨论取得一致。实体标准的优点是科学性强、逻辑合理,缺陷是使问题复杂化。从科学性角度考虑,应该采用实体标准。

The standards of criminal typology can be subcategorized into the formal standard and the entitative standard. The former, which stratifies crimes according to degrees of the prescribed penalty, enjoys such advantages as being explicit and straightforward, but its defects lie in the tendency to substitute the legislator＇ s standards for all and in its lack of logic. The latter, on the other hand, categorizes crimes in accordance with the seriousness of criminal behaviors themselves. The entitative standard consists of three perspectives, i.e. , the state perspective, the expert＇ s perspective and the common people＇ s perspective. The state perspective expresses the legislator＇ s understanding and judgment of the seriousness of a crime, the expert＇ s perspective shows the rational expertise offered by criminologists, and the common people＇s perspective reflects common people＇ s perception and comments. As there may be different results of the typology from different perspectives, an agreement should be reached through in-depth analyses and multilateral discussions. While the advantages of the entitative standard lie in its rationality and logic, its shortcoming is the tendency to make things more complicated. But overall, it should be adopted as it proves more reasonable.