渎职罪的不法构造与解释方向

Unlawful Construction and Interpretive Direction for the Crimes of Dereliction of Duty

面对渎职罪中“重大损失”要件引发的各种问题,刑法学有必要站在渎职罪本质的高度重新审视其不法构造,进而锚定司法适用的基本方向。客观的超过要素说、内在的客观处罚条件说、“中间项”的结果型情状说等既有方案,没有摆脱结果犯的固有思维,均难以从根本上消除与“重大损失”要件相关的理论困境。在渎职犯罪领域,我国刑法采用的独立型立法模式凸显了对公务活动公正性这一“中间层法益”的专属保护,相较于依附型模式更能契合现代社会提前预防系统性风险的治理需要。欲充分发挥该模式所蕴含的优势,需要将渎职罪的不法评价重心从人身、财产法益转移到公务行为公正性法益上,从死伤、财产损失等结果转移到渎职行为本身的情节上。当前,司法者完全可以在条文语义可容许的范围内,遵循以渎职行为和公务行为公正性为核心的解释方向,不宜将“造成恶劣社会影响”认定为渎职罪的入罪标准。

In the face of the various dilemmas arising from the element of“heavy losses”in the Crimes of Dereliction of Duty,it is necessary for Dogmatic of the Criminal Law to stand at the height of the nature of the Crimes of Dereliction of Duty and the mode of legislation,to re-examine its unlawful structure,and thus to establish an interpretive direction of judicial application as well as a direction of reform for the improvement of legislation.The objective punishment condition theory,the internal objective punishment condition theory,and the“intermediate item”consequential situation theory are not free from the inherent thinking of the consequential offence,and it is difficult to eliminate the dilemma associated with the element of“heavy losses”from the root.In the area of Crimes of Dereliction of Duty,the independent legislative model adopted in China’s criminal law highlights the exclusive protection of the“intermediate layer of legal interests”of the impartiality of official activities,which is better suited to the governance needs of modern society for the early prevention of systemic risks than the dependent model.However,in order to give full play to the advantages of this model,it is necessary to shift the center of gravity of the evaluation of the offence of Crimes of Dereliction of Duty from the legal interests of person and property to the legal interests of the impartiality of official activities,and from the results of deaths,injuries and property losses to the circumstances of the acts of dereliction of duty themselves.At present,the judiciary can follow the interpretation direction centred on acts of dereliction of duty and official activities within the scope of the semantics of the provisions,and it should be considered inappropriate for“causing execrable social impact”to be the incrimination standard for the Crimes of Dereliction of Duty.