刑事合规五大实体学理误区的厘清与辨正

The Clarification and Differentiation of Five Entity Theory Misunderstanding of Criminal Compliance

随着刑事合规制度的推行,理论界和实务界就刑事合规制度的司法效果是否仅限于不起诉产生了分歧,并进一步对刑法是否为刑事合规制度的依据以及刑事合规不起诉制度是否局限于轻罪展开了争论。此外,有关单位承担刑事责任的依据及单位同单位中自然人的责任划分也存在争议。为保障刑事合规制度在实践中的顺利推进,应当为刑事合规的多元化司法效果提供学理依据,确认刑法是刑事合规的实体法依据,澄清刑事合规不起诉制度的适用范围并不局限于轻罪。立足于单位固有刑事责任论,对组织体责任论展开抨击,并纠正“放过单位但不放过自然人”的学理误区,而是根据企业犯罪的类型决定是否放过企业,进而决定是否放过自然人。

With the implementation of the criminal compliance system,the academic circles and practical field disagree on whether the judicial effect of the criminal compliance system is limited to non-prosecution,and whether criminal law is the basis of the criminal compliance system.Further debate on whether the criminal compliance non-prosecution system should be limited to misdemeanors is conducted.In addition,the basis of the relevant units to bear criminal responsibility and the division of responsibility between units and natural persons in units are also in controversy.In order to ensure the smooth advancement of the criminal compliance system in practice,it is necessary to provide a theoretical basis for the diversified judicial effect of criminal compliance,confirm that criminal law is the substantive legal basis of criminal compliance,and clarify that the scope of application of the non-prosecution system of criminal compliance is not limited to minor crimes.Based on the theory of inherent criminal responsibility of the unit,this paper criticized the theory of organizational responsibility and corrects the misunderstanding of"sparing the unit,but not the natural person".Instead,it decides whether to spare the enterprise and then the natural person according to the type of corporate crime.