刑讯逼供“致人伤残、死亡”的定性研究

The legal classification of extorting a confessionby torture causing disability or death

关于刑讯逼供“致人伤残、死亡”的定性,理论界长期存在争论,在司法实践中,对于该条款的定性不准确,导致了定罪混乱、罪刑失衡等情况。以往各种学说在解释该法条合理性时无法在责任主义与犯罪构成上自圆其说,对于出现重结果的刑讯逼供行为,不顾行为人主观如何,一概以故意杀人罪、故意伤害罪对司法工作人员处理既不理性,也不现实。从结果加重犯的构造与立法效果来看,只有将《刑法》第247条视为结果加重犯并适当修改法条才能妥当解决以上问题。

The legal classification of extorting a confession by torture leading to disability or death has long been debated in the academic community.In judicial practice,misinterpretation of this provision has caused confusion in convictions and imbalance between crime and punishment.Previous theories attempting to justify the reasonableness of this provision have failed to reconcile the principle of responsibility with the constitution of crime.In cases of torture resulting in severe consequences,indiscriminately treating judicial staff as guilty of intentional homicide or intentional injury,regardless of their subjective intent,is neither rational nor practical.These issues can only be adequately addressed by interpreting Article 247 of the Criminal Law as an aggravated consequential offense and amending the provision appropriately.