关于妨害新冠肺炎疫情防控行为适用《刑法》第330条的法律分析

Legal Analysis on the Application of Article 330 of the Criminal Law to Interference of the Prevention and Control of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia

为保障新冠肺炎疫情防控工作的顺利开展,2020年2月最高人民法院、最高人民检察院、公安部、司法部(以下简称“两高两部”)发布了《关于依法惩治妨害新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情防控违法犯罪的意见》(以下简称《疫情防控意见》)。根据《疫情防控意见》规定,适用于妨害甲类传染病防控的“妨害传染病防治罪”同时也适用于乙类传染病新型冠状病毒肺炎(以下简称新冠肺炎)。针对此项规定,《疫情防控意见》是否违背了罪刑法定原则?是否进行了创设性规定?为解决这一争议,本文论证了《疫情防控意见》将妨害传染病防治罪适用于乙类传染病新型冠状病毒具有合法性,并未进行创设性规定。同时在文中界定了此罪的适用范围,以避免与危害公共安全罪相混淆。分析目前我国《刑法》有关妨害传染病防治罪规定的缺陷,对此提出了一些完善建议,希望能够在重大疫情期间充分发挥该罪维护传染病防治管理制度的功能。

In order to ensure the smooth development of the prevention and control of the novelcoronavirus pneumonia,in February 2020,the“two ministries and two high authorities”jointly issued the“Opinions on Punishing Interference of the Prevention and Control of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia”(hereinafter referred to as Epidemic Prevention and Control Opinions).Epidemic Prevention and Control Opinions is both applicable to the crime of impairing infectious disease prevention of Class A infectious diseases and novelcoronavirus pneumonia of Class B infectious diseases.Does Epidemic Prevention and Control Opinionsviolatethe criminal law in principle and include creation requirements?Toresolve this controversy,this article demonstrates the legitimacy of application of the crime of obstructing the prevention and control of infectious diseases into novelcoronavirus pneumonia of Class B infectious diseases,which means it does not include creation requirements.At the same time,the scope of application of this crime is defined in the text to avoid confusion with the crime of endangering public safety.Some improved suggestions are put forward by analyzing the shortcomings in the current Criminal Law of China regarding the crime of obstructing the prevention and control of infectious diseases,hoping to give full play to the function of the crime to maintain the management system of infectious diseases prevention and control during major epidemics.