我国共犯模式的合理选择——以区分制和单一制的价值评判为视角

The Rational Choice for Complicity System: From the Perspective of Value-judging for Differenzierungs System and Einheits System

以限缩正犯概念为基础建构的区分制是罪刑法定原则的体现,以扩张正犯概念为理论基础的单一制却更好地贯彻了规范主义的立场和责任原则、罪刑均衡原则。我国古代的共犯立法既缺乏罪刑法定的理念,也缺乏罪责刑个别化的理念,现有的共犯模式确立之时也没有基于维护构成要件定型性、贯彻罪刑法定的考量。从我国共犯的历史传统、共犯确立的立法进程考察,及从现行共犯模式的立法规范特征分析,主张我国共犯模式归属于区分制的观点没有法律上的依据,相反却具有单一制的某些特征。因为单一制可以兼顾罪刑法定和罪责均衡,而区分制为实现追求罪责均衡的努力不但带来理论体系内部的复杂和矛盾,而且已然偏离了罪刑法定,所以我国共犯模式应采用单一制。

Differenzierungs System,which based on the hindered principal concept,reflecting the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime.And Einheits System,which based on the expanded principal concept,implementing the principles of paternalism,obligation principle and principle of balance between a crime and a punishment.The legislation for complicity in ancient China neither has the ideology of legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime,and nor ideology of individuation for crimes and punishment.The existing complicity system has no consideration for constitutive requirements stability and the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime at its beginning of formed.From the inspection of legislative history,legislative establishing process and the regulative characteristics on our complicity crimes,Chinese complicity crimes mode is not belongs to Differenzierungs System.On the contrary,it has some features of Einheits System.Differenzierungs System will bring the complexity and contradictions at the internal theoretical system for it＇s pursuit for balance between a crime and a punishment,and it already deviated from the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime.Einheits system can take into account the balance of legality and culpability,hence it would be adopted.