从“萨姆之子”法案看罪犯的表达自由

发布时间：2018-06-05 13:11

本文选题：“萨姆之子”法案 + 表达自由　；参考：《中国社会科学院研究生院》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：罪犯在实施犯罪行为的同时也可能获得了很高的社会知名度，，虽然这种臭名昭著被大众所不齿，但是，好奇心的作祟还是使出版商嗅到了商机，利用这种“知名度”发表犯罪回忆录类的书籍或改编剧本，使罪犯获得了大量的利润，但是同时，这种不公平给受害人带来了伤害，也引起了司法机关的重视和抗议，美国纽约州率先出台了“萨姆之子”法案，希望通过行政法令强制对罪犯的获利进行控制和管理。但这一法令引起了很多问题和思考，主要是停留在罪犯表达自由问题的争论。回望国内，关于人身自由受到限制和政治权利被剥夺的罪犯的表达自由问题，我国虽没有像“萨姆之子”法案这样的控制罪犯书写犯罪回忆录牟利的法令，但是在刑法的条文中却存在将政治权利概念扩大化的问题，这一范围界定与宪法中的规定和立法者意图相违背，剥夺了罪犯的表达自由，而该问题是值得引起重视和讨论的。本文通过对美国“萨姆之子”法案出台背景和后续发展的介绍，分析了美国言论自由的法律解释、评价标准、罪犯这个特殊群体的言论自由以及没收利润的分配模式，从上述标准展开，从理论和程序两方面解释了“萨姆之子”法案的违宪性和可操控性差的问题并对国内情况进行了分析和说明。笔者认为，表达自由作为一项天赋人权，是不能够被剥夺的，罪犯也应该享受言论出版自由。即使美国“萨姆之子”法案有如此正当的动机，也因为其涉及到基于内容对言论进行压制而需要严格审查标准被判违宪，那么在中国，目前立法和司法界都处于长期空白的这个领域，更应该受到重视，并由此问题展开对表达自由这个题目的讨论和解释。作为一个不能忽视的问题，笔者希望引用美国萨姆之子法案的先例，分别从犯罪人的出版获利权、这种权利的法理来源、怎样处理与受害者的关系、社会救济、国内实际这几个方面分别展开，力求给国内罪犯言论自由这一空白领域带来一点思考。
[Abstract]:Criminals may have gained a high profile while committing criminal acts, and although this infamy has been disparaged by the public, curiosity has made publishers smell business opportunities. Making use of this "popularity" to publish books or adapted plays in the category of crime memoirs, the criminals have made a lot of profits, but at the same time, this injustice has done harm to the victims and aroused the attention and protest of the judicial organs. New York State introduced the son of Sam Act to enforce the control and management of criminals' profits. But this law has caused a lot of questions and thinking, mainly on the issue of freedom of expression of criminals debate. Looking back at our country, with regard to the issue of freedom of expression of criminals whose personal liberty is restricted and political rights denied, although China does not have a law such as the "son of Sam" Act, which controls criminals to write criminal memoirs for profit, However, there exists the problem of extending the concept of political rights in the articles of the Criminal Law, which is contrary to the provisions of the Constitution and the intention of the legislator, and deprives the criminals of their freedom of expression, which is worthy of attention and discussion. By introducing the background and subsequent development of the "son of Sam" Act in the United States, this paper analyzes the legal interpretation of freedom of speech in the United States, the evaluation criteria, the freedom of speech of this special group of criminals and the pattern of distribution of confiscated profits. The unconstitutionality and controllability of the "son of Sam" bill are explained in terms of theory and procedure from the above standards, and the domestic situation is analyzed and explained. The author believes that freedom of expression, as a natural human right, can not be deprived, and criminals should enjoy freedom of speech and publication. Even if the "son of Sam" bill in the United States has such a legitimate motive, and because it involves a clampdown on speech based on content and requires strict censorship criteria to be found unconstitutional, then in China, At present, both the legislative and judicial circles are in a long blank field, which should be paid more attention to, and the discussion and interpretation of the subject of freedom of expression should be carried out. As a problem that can not be ignored, the author hopes to quote the precedent of the Sam's son Act in the United States, respectively from the criminal's right to profit from the publication, the legal source of this right, how to deal with the relationship with the victim, social assistance, In order to bring some thoughts to the blank field of freedom of speech of criminals in China, these aspects are carried out separately.
【学位授予单位】：中国社会科学院研究生院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D971.2

【共引文献】