论刑事诉讼对恐怖犯罪的早期介入——基于中美司法实践的比较讨论

On Early Intervention of Criminal Litigation in Terrorism Crimes——base on Comparative Discussion of Sino- America Legal Practice

恐怖犯罪在全球一直处于上升和蔓延趋势,其暴力性质和严重的破坏力使得各国在应对这种犯罪类型时都不得不调整针对传统犯罪的打击政策。相对于军事打击等手段而言,司法手段在恐怖犯罪中的适用争议性是最小的,因此越来越成为各国政府的首选。而为了有效控制恐怖犯罪的蔓延,早期追诉又成了一个新的刑事司法政策。但早期追诉也带来了很多问题,比如介入的时间难以确定;由于没有实施行为,证明难以完成等。共谋理论在司法实践中的发展在很大程度上解决了这些难题,共谋责任和独立追诉政策的并用效果显著,不过由此带来的追诉面扩大以及仅就犯罪意图进行追诉的责难可能是我们在相当长的时间内都必须面对的。

Terrorism crimes are spreading rapidly and globally of which the violent nature and destructive force have urged governments to adjust their traditional combating policies so as to adapt to terrorism crimes. Compared with military measures,the judicial approach is the least controversial control in practice and thus has become a priority for most countries. In order to effectively control terrorism crimes,the prosecution at the early stage has become a new criminal justice policy,though early prosecution has also encountered many predicaments,for instance,the time to intervene is difficult to specify and the offence cannot be proved for lack of conducts. Nevertheless,the conspiracy theory in judicial practice has solved many problems to a large extent by application together with independent prosecution policy. In spite of the remarkable effect,some negative consequences should be resolved in the long run such as the expansion of prosecution boundary and the reproach for prosecution merely based on criminal intentions.