实体法与程序法的对话:以刑事合规问题为中心

Dialogue between Substantive Law and Procedural Law:Focusing on Criminal Compliance Issues

企业合规是多学科交叉问题,需要学科之间的充分对话。就刑事合规制度而言,在合规从宽的正当性基础、实践方案、合规全流程理论等方面,都存在实体法和程序法沟通不畅的问题。就合规从宽的正当性基础而言,公共利益衡量、法益恢复、罪责自负、有效犯罪预防以及替代性刑罚等理论方案都仅有政策上的依据,因缺乏规范性而不宜作为合规从宽的正当性根据。对合规从宽的理解,还是要回到量刑理论本身。就具体的实践方案而言,无论是刑事实体法还是司法解释,都没有为分离追诉提供制度支撑。自然人犯罪案件的合规整改范围不宜走极端,在有限的范围内,应当予以认可。就合规全流程理论而言,要明确的是,法院应主要通过行使定罪、量刑权的方式参与合规改革,与此同时,严守自身中立裁判者的职能定位。刑罚执行程序中,合规缓刑缺乏法律根据,应当慎行,但合规可以成为减刑、假释的判断因素之一。无论是作为悔改表现的判断因素,还是作为公共利益维护的判断依据,都应当严肃、科学地加以评估,避免合规从宽被滥用。

Corporate compliance is a multidisciplinary cross-cutting issue that requires adequate communication between disciplines.As far as the criminal compliance system is concerned,there is a miscommunication between substantive and procedural law in terms of the justification basis for leniency in compliance,practice programs,and the theory of the whole process of compliance.In terms of the justification for leniency compliance,theoretical options such as public interest weighing,restitution,self-responsibility,effective crime prevention and alternative sentencing have only a policy basis and are not suitable for justifying leniency compliance due to their lack of normativity.The understanding of compliance with leniency should still go back to the sentencing theory itself.In terms of practical solutions,neither the substantive criminal law nor the judicial interpretations provide institutional support for the separation of prosecution.The scope of compliance rectification in cases of crimes committed by natural persons should not be extreme and should be recognized to a limited extent.In terms of the whole process theory of compliance,it should be clear that courts should be involved in compliance reform primarily through the exercise of their powers of conviction and sentencing,while at the same time strictly observing their function as neutral adjudicators.Compliance probation lacks a legal basis in the penalty enforcement process and should be done with caution,but compliance can be one of the bases of judgment for sentence reduction and parole.Whether as information for judging the performance of repentance or as a basis for judging the preservation of the public interest,it should be assessed seriously and scientifically to avoid the abuse of compliance with leniency.