原因自由行为的例外模式:反思、证成与适用

The Exception Mode of Actio Libera in Causa:Reflection,Justification and Implementation

原因自由行为是无法避免“例外”的法律形象,前置模式无法回避不法认定的例外,例外模式也无法回避归责判断的例外。前置模式将原因自由行为视作不法问题而非归责问题,不仅存在本质性的错误,也难以真正贯彻到底。传统例外模式的缺陷在于立法依据的欠缺和理论基础的薄弱。对此,前者可以诉诸《刑法》第18条第4款的规定,将之视作处罚原因自由行为的“注意规定”;后者可以诉诸特别归责的思想并引入负担违反的概念。根据归责的“答责对话模式”,负担违反的后果是使行为人丧失援引归责阻却事由的权利。在例外模式中,成立故意犯罪无须“双重故意”,行为人对原因行为有避免可能、对嗣后实施的犯罪有预见可能即为已足,过失的原因自由行为仍有存在的必要。作为特别归责的体现,原因自由行为对于“先前过错”的归责具有建构性的意义。

Actio libera in causa is a legal figure that cannot avoid“exceptions”;the preposition mode cannot avoid exceptions to the determination of wrongfulness,nor can the exception mode avoid exceptions to the determination of imputation.The preposition mode,which views alic as a matter of wrongfulness rather than a matter of imputation,is fundamentally flawed,and its propositions cannot really be carried through.The shortcomings of the traditional exception mode lie in the lack of legislative basis and the weak theoretical foundation.In this regard,the former can resort to the provisions of Article 18,Paragraph 4,of the Penal Code,which is regarded as a“provision of attention”;the latter can resort to the idea of extraordinary imputation and introduce the concept of“obligation”.According to the“dialogical mode of imputation”,the consequence of the breach of obligation is that the violator loses the right to invoke the reason of defense.In the exception mode,“double intentions”is not required for the establishment of an intentional crime;it is sufficient that the violator had the possibility of avoiding the causative act and foreseeing the subsequent commission of the crime,and the negligent alic is still necessary.As the embodiment of extraordinary imputation,the alic has a constructive significance for the imputation of“prior fault”.