论受贿罪中的国家工作人员

On the State-functionary in the Offense of Bribery

对受贿罪中国家工作人员的界定,在方法论上需遵循融贯性与合目的性的双重要求。公务说的立场具有妥当性;但对公务应作限定理解,即必须是与国家有关的事务,需要体现国家的意志性。对受贿罪中"从事公务"的理解,应区别于贪污罪。受贿罪中的"从事公务",在范围上不限于行使公权力的场景,也包括国家以私主体出现时的情形。公务与劳务并非对立的范畴,管理性并非成立公务的必备要素;只要相应事务具有国家性的面向,即事务的处理权限可追溯至主权者的委托,则劳务性的活动也可能构成公务。国家出资企业中的委派类主体与评标或政府采购活动中作为国有单位之代表的人员,其作为国家工作人员的国家性,体现在国有单位意志的代表性与业务内容的关联性上。缺乏国有单位意志的代表性,或是业务内容与国有资产的监管没有关联,均不应认定为国家工作人员。

In defining the concept of state-functionary in the offense of bribery, it is necessary to follow the dual requirements of consistency and purposiveness in the methodology of statutory interpretation. The position of Public-Affairs-Doctrine is appropriate to be hold. Meanwhile, "public affairs" should be understood to be those related to the state, and they need to reflect the will of the state. The meaning of "engaging in public affairs" in bribery is different from the same element in public embezzlement.In the offense of bribery, the scope of "engaging in public affairs" is not limited to the scenes of exercising public power, also including the situations where the state appears as a private subject. "Public affairs" and "labor services" are not opposite categories, and the factor of management is not an essential constituent for the former. If some activities of labor services have the feature of state orientation, which means, the authority of dealing with them can be traced back to the entrustment of the sovereign’s power, they would also constitute "public affairs". Two kinds of special subjects appointed by stated-owned units have been regarded as state functionary, and their dimension of state orientation embodies mainly both in their representativeness of the state-owned units’ will and the relevance of their working affairs with state-owned assets. In the scenarios of being lack of such representativeness or relevance, the concerning subjects ought not to be recognized as state functionary.