我国刑法中紧急避险本质理论反思与完善——兼论对社会连带责任说之摒弃

Rethinking and Perfecting the Theory of Emergency Avoidance Essence in Chinese Criminal Law——Also on Discarding the Theory of Social Joint Liability

基于美国立法和司法界对功利主义作为紧急避险正当化依据的排斥,部分美国学者主张紧急避险正当化的依据是社会连带责任或社会团结义务。此学说近来被我国一部分学者所推崇。他们认为其有利于维护法的安定性和法秩序,并主张于反思我国通说,改变我国从利益衡量角度理解紧急避险本质理论的立场,转向于支持社会连带责任说,并在此基础上进一步严格紧急避险制度的适用条件。此主张并不符合我国实际,其本身的正确性值得商榷。在类似新冠疫情等重大灾害面前,此观点更是显得苍白无力。摒弃社会连带责任说,坚持和发展传统法益衡量说,进一步肯定对生命的紧急避险,既有助于发挥紧急避险制度存在之价值,又能够在紧急灾害中更合理地保证国家、社会及多数人的安全。

Based on the rejection of utilitarianism as the justification base of urgent danger prevention in American legislature and jurisdiction,some American scholars propose that the justification base of urgent danger prevention is Social Joint and Several Liability or social unity responsibility.The very idea has been advocated by some Chinese scholars.Holding that this will help maintain the legal stability and order,they advocate the reflection upon the popular theory of our country,the change of stand to understand the nature of urgent danger prevention from the perspective of interest evaluation,the turn to social joint responsibility,and restricting the application conditions for urgent danger prevention on this base.This proposal is not in accordance with the situations in China,and its validity is controversial.In front of great disasters such as the pandemic of novel coronavirus,the very proposal becomes powerless.We should reject the Social Joint and Several Liability,uphold and develop the traditional legal interest evaluation,and further assert the urgent danger prevention for life.This will not only give the play to the value of urgent danger prevention,but also more reasonably protect the safety of the nation,society and the majority in urgent disasters.