论毒品犯罪中“动态持有”的司法认定规则

The Judicial Determination Rules of“Dynamic Possession”in Drug Crimes

吸毒者使毒品处于运动过程中被查获,又没有证据证明行为人是为了实施贩卖等其他毒品犯罪,且查获的毒品数量达到较大以上的,应当认定为“动态持有”毒品行为还是运输毒品行为,在理论界和司法实践中都存在争议。社会危害性是犯罪的本质特征,亦是区分不同犯罪行为的有效标准,单纯地从目的和状态上对“动态持有”和运输进行区分均有失偏颇。历次毒品审判工作座谈会议纪要就“动态持有”毒品行为的法律适用部分持不同的司法立场,《武汉会议纪要》以“数量论”统一司法裁判标准,不符合刑事司法应当在刑事立法的框架下运作的要求,因其严厉程度又成为我国毒品犯罪刑事政策的缩影,因此,在适用这一司法规则会面临诸多困境。厘清“动态持有”的具体内涵,并探求区分“动态持有”和运输的具体规则,方是解决这一问题的有效出路。

It is controversial in both theoretical circles and judicial practice as to whether it should be considered as a“dynamic possession”drug behavior or transportation of drugs behavior,if a drug addict is seized while the drug is in the movement,and there is no evidence that the perpetrator is committed to other drug crimes such as trafficking,and the number of drugs seized exceeds a large number.Social harm is the essential feature of crime,and it is also an effective standard for distinguishing different criminal acts.Thus,the distinction between“dynamic holding”and transportation simply from the purpose and status is biased.The minutes of the previous symposiums on drug trials held different judicial stances on the legal application of“dynamic possession”of drugs.The“Minutes of Wuhan Conference”unified judicial adjudication standards based on the“quantity theory”,which does not conform to the framework of criminal justice in criminal legislation,but because of its strictness,the requirements for lower-level operations have become the epitome of my country s criminal drug-related policies.Therefore,the application of this judicial rule faces many difficulties.Clarifying the specific meaning of“dynamic holding”and exploring specific rules for distinguishing between“dynamic holding”and transportation is an effective way to solve this problem.