The Constitutional Basis of the Legal Interest: A Review of the Sub-provisions of the Criminal Law

SHEN Wei; LIU Lei

doi:10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022100041

Volume 39 Issue 5

Oct. 2023

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition) > 2023 > 39(5): 645-659

SHEN Wei, LIU Lei. The Constitutional Basis of the Legal Interest: A Review of the Sub-provisions of the Criminal Law[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 39(5): 645-659. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022100041

Citation:

SHEN Wei, LIU Lei. The Constitutional Basis of the Legal Interest: A Review of the Sub-provisions of the Criminal Law[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 39(5): 645-659. doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022100041

Citation:

PDF( 1054 KB)

The Constitutional Basis of the Legal Interest: A Review of the Sub-provisions of the Criminal Law

doi: 10.19979/j.cnki.issn10082689.2022100041

SHEN Wei,
LIU Lei

Law School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China

Received Date: 2022-10-10
Publish Date: 2023-10-25

Abstract

Abstract

The concept of legal interest is the result of the secularization of natural law and the effect of liberalism on criminal law, and its creation is intended to delineate the boundaries of criminal punishability, so as to limit public power and protect human rights. However, the development process of legal interest always has some drawbacks, such as value hollowing out and concept spiritualization, which makes it become a tool for the legislator to expand the penalty power. Nowadays, the legitimacy test of criminal legislation is still inseparable from the legal interest, but relying solely on the traditional concept of legal interest can play a very limited role. The essence of the constitution is the spirit of the rule of law, the highest legal effect and the highly open and inclusive nature of the constitution determine that only by relying on the constitution can the legal interest protection principle give full play to its normative effect. Therefore, this paper explores the causes of the failure of the protection principle of legal interests by sorting out the problems existing in the development process of the theory of legal interests. Then it proves that only on the basis of the constitution can the principle of protecting legal interests be revitalized. Then under the guidance of the spirit of constitution, the system of legal interest is rebuilt with the core of fundamental rights. Finally, the article examines the current provisions of the criminal law of our country through the theory of legal interests oriented by constitution.
- legal interest theory,
- personal legal interest,
- collective legal interest,
- criticizing legislation

FullText(HTML)

References(37)

References

[1]	杨兴培. 中国刑法领域“法益理论”的深度思考及商榷[J]. 法学,2015(9):3-15.
[2]	E. 博登海默. 法理学[M]. 邓正来, 译. 北京: 中国政法大学出版社, 2017.
[3]	郑永流. 法哲学是什么?[J]. 法哲学与法社会学论丛,1998(00):1-52,387.
[4]	阿敏·英格兰德. 通过宪法振兴实质的法益理论[C]//马寅翔, 译. 赵秉志, 帕夫利克. 当代德国刑事法研究. 北京: 法律出版社, 2017: 94-95.
[5]	林山田. 刑法通论[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2012.
[6]	克劳斯·罗克辛. 德国刑法学总论[M]. 王世洲, 译. 北京: 法律出版社, 2005.
[7]	钟宏彬. 法益理论的宪法基础[D]. 中国台北: 元照出版公司, 2012.
[8]	克努特·阿梅隆. 德国刑法学中法益保护理论的现状[J]. 日高义博,姚培培,译. 中德法学论坛,2017(2):17-37.
[9]	舒洪水,张晶. 近现代法益理论的发展及其功能化解读[J]. 中国刑事法杂志,2010(9):16-23.
[10]	李斯特. 德国刑法教科书[M]. 徐久生, 译. 北京: 法律出版社, 2006.
[11]	许玉秀. 当代刑法思潮[M]. 北京: 中国民主法制出版社, 2005.
[12]	杨萌. 德国刑法学中法益理论的历史发展及现状述评[J]. 学术界,2012(6):214-224+289.
[13]	许内曼. 法益保护原则——刑法构成要件及其解释之宪法界限之汇集点[C]//何赖傑, 译. 许玉秀, 陈志辉. 不疑不惑献身法与正义: 许内曼教授刑事法论文选辑. 中国台北: 新学林出版股份有限公司, 2006: 227-248.
[14]	蔡英. 人权视野中的罪刑法定原则[D]. 重庆: 西南政法大学, 2010.
[15]	切萨雷·贝卡里亚. 论犯罪与刑罚[M]. 黄风, 译. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2008.
[16]	周漾沂. 从实质法概念重新定义法益:以法主体论述为基础[J]. 台湾大学法学论丛,2012,41(3):981-1053.
[17]	林倍伸. 论妨害公务罪: 以法治国家中的公务概念为核心[M]. 台北: 元照出版公司, 2017.
[18]	乌尔斯·金德霍伊泽尔. 法益保护与规范效力的保障:论刑法的目的 J]. 陈璇,译. 中外法学,2015,27(2):548-559.
[19]	埃里克·希尔根多夫. 德国刑法学从传统到现在[M]. 江朔, 黄笑岩, 等译. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2015.
[20]	陈子平. 刑法总论[M]. 台北: 元照出版公司, 2012.
[21]	克劳斯·罗克辛. 刑法的任务不是法益保护吗?[J]. 樊文,译. 刑事法评论,2006(2):146-165.
[22]	林来梵. 宪法学讲义[M]. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2018.
[23]	黎敏. 德国宪法学的实证主义转向及其根本问题[J]. 比较法研究,2019(2):188-200.
[24]	雷达,郑旭江. 法秩序统一视野下“个人信息”的认定−从侵犯公民个人信息罪切入[J]. 北京科技大学学报(社会科学版),2023,39(3):310-319.
[25]	陈璇. 法益概念与刑事立法正当性检验[J]. 比较法研究,2020(3):51-72.
[26]	克劳斯·罗克辛. 对批判立法之法益概念的检视[J]. 陈璇,译. 法学评论,2015,33(1):53-67.
[27]	郑贤君. 作为客观价值秩序的基本权−从德国法看基本权保障义务[J]. 西北政法学院学报,2006,11(2):35-45.
[28]	杨承烨. 论国家之基本权保护义务——以德国宪法法学之发展为中心[M]. 台北: 元照出版公司, 2017.
[29]	韩大元, 王建学. 基本权与宪法判例[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2013.
[30]	陈志龙. 法益与刑事立法[M]. 台北: 台湾大学丛书编辑委员会, 1992.
[31]	孙国祥. 论集体法益的刑法保护及其边界[J]. 法学研究,2018,40(6):37-52.
[32]	屠振宇. 未列举基本权利的宪法保护[J]. 中外法学,2007,19(1):40-50.
[33]	卡尔·施米特. 宪法学说[M]. 刘锋, 译. 上海: 上海人民出版社, 2016.
[34]	陈志龙. 诽谤罪与言论自由之界限−二个宪法权利冲突:言论自由权与名誉权冲突[J]. 月旦法学教室,2002,2(12):12-13.
[35]	唐煜枫. 论诽谤罪成立之宪法限制[J]. 甘肃政法学院学报,2006(2):110-115.
[36]	王姝,陈通. 我国刑法对法益保护前置化问题研究[J]. 刑法论丛,2017,51(3):161-180.
[37]	陈历文. 刑法立法观之争的反思与出路[J]. 北京科技大学学报(社会科学版),2022,38(3):346-352.