超越行为责任:单位犯罪主体关系传统认识的批判与重构

Beyond Behavioral Responsibility: Criticism and Reconstruction of Traditional Understanding of The Subject Relationship of Unit Crime

单位犯罪主体关系结构上的“互斥”“依存”“包容”“同化”四元认知,直接导致了制度异化、适用不平等、存在处罚漏洞、阻碍刑事合规改革进程等不良实践效果。究其根源,对行为责任论的固守是传统主体关系认知得以形成的根源所在。单位固有责任论本土化为主体关系认知的合理化提供了正确方向,但由于行为责任论的思想桎梏,使单位组织体归责依旧离不开自然人的行为和意志,更无法化解同化认知带来的实践困境。转而以归咎的刑事责任为立场,以存在组织缺陷作为单位组织体的刑事责任前提,以没有履行法定或组织体义务作为直接负责的主管人员承担刑事责任的前提,实现单位组织体、直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员三者刑事责任之间规范意义上的完全分离、平行追责,不仅可为企业刑事合规不起诉改革提供更为妥当的实体法基础,更可为刑事合规的“双不起诉”提供更大余地,满足“放过企业也放过企业主”现实的需要。

The four metacognitions of "mutual exclusion", "dependence", "inclusion" and "assimilation" in the relationship structure of the subject of unit crime have directly led to adverse practical effects, such as system alienation, unequal application, the existence of punishment loopholes, and impeding the reform process of criminal compliance. Basically speaking, the adherence to the theory of behavioral responsibility is the root of the formation of the traditional subject relationship cognition. The localization of the theory of inherent responsibility of the unit provides the right direction for the rationalization of the cognition of the subject relationship. However, due to the ideological shackle of the theory of behavioral responsibility, the attribution of the organization of the unit is still inseparable from the behavior and will of natural persons, and it is also unable to resolve the practical dilemma brought by assimilation cognition. Instead, take the imputed criminal responsibility as the position, take the existence of organizational defects as the premise of the criminal responsibility of the unit organization, and take the failure to perform legal or organizational obligations as the premise for the directly responsible supervisor to bear criminal responsibility, so as to realize the complete separation and parallel accountability in the normative sense between the criminal responsibilities of the unit organization, the directly responsible supervisor and other directly responsible personnel, It can not only provide a more appropriate substantive law basis for the reform of non-prosecution of enterprise criminal compliance, but also provide more room for the "double non prosecution" of criminal compliance, and meet the practical needs of "letting go of both enterprises and business owners".