监督过失责任视角下事前合规的出罪路径

Decriminalization Paths of Compliance Before Rectification Underthe Perspective of Supervision Fault Liability

引入企业合规的过程实际上以引入刑事合规为核心,我国司法实践中对于发挥刑事合规的刑事激励作用已初现成效,但存在混淆刑事合规出罪功能与免责功能的问题,为此应依据时间标准将刑事合规类型化为事前合规与整改合规。在风险社会的背景下,刑法的价值取向转向为预防,故应着重探讨具备预防功能的事前合规,同时由于事前合规兼具出罪功能且出罪功能的发挥始终以单位犯罪的归责为中心,恰逢我国由替代责任到自己责任的过渡期,故应以监督过失责任为切入点,探讨事前合规与我国单位刑事归责原则的兼容性。依托于监督过失理论,以新过失论为依据,以结果回避义务为判断标准,有效的事前合规可以作为企业履行监督义务的有力佐证,因尽到结果回避义务而不存在构成要件的过失,阻却构成要件符合性而成为出罪事由。

The criminal compliance is the core for enterprise compliance.In the judicial practice in China,the criminal compliance has shown its incentive role,but the decriminalization and exemption for criminal compliance are confusing.Therefore,it is recommended to categorize criminal compliance into compliances before and after rectification.In the context of risk society,the criminal law is oriented to crime prevention,so the prevention function of compliance before rectification should be the focus.Meanwhile,compliance before rectification has the function of decriminalization which is decided by whether a unit should be responsible for crimes.Coinciding with a transition period from vicarious liability to own responsibility in China,the supervision fault liability should be the starting point to explore the compatibility between compliance before rectification and criminal attribution for units in China.Relying on the supervisory fault theory,with the new fault theory as the basis and the result avoidance obligation as the judgment standard,the effective compliance before rectification can be used as the strong evidence that the enterprise performs the supervisory obligation.Because the result avoidance obligation is fulfilled,there is no negligence of the constituent elements,which can be taken as the support of decriminalization.