论劳动教养刑事化
发布时间：2018-11-14 09:59
【摘要】： 劳动教养制度自五十年代产生以来，在维护我国社会治安、预防犯罪方面发挥了很大的作用。但随社会发展，其弊端日渐显露，劳动教养制度改革成为当前的一个热点、难点问题，研究它有重要的实践意义。 正文由三部分组成。 第一部分：劳动教养概述篇 概述了劳动教养制度产生的历史及发展的历程，以及现行劳动教养适用的对象和适用程序。 第二部分：劳动教养性质辨析篇 介绍当前有关劳动教养性质的观点，包括行政强制措施说，行政处罚说，刑事处罚说，保安处分说，教养处遇说。通过对这几种观点的辨析，指出各种观点存在的不足，着重辨析了保安处分与劳动教养的区别。本文认为，目前的劳动教养制度既具有刑事处罚的性质，又具有行政处罚的性质。只有通过改革，才能使劳动教养具有明确的性质和法律地位。 第三部分：劳动教养改革完善篇 明确指出劳动教养具有存置的必要性，但是因为它的确存在很多缺陷，所以，改革劳动教养制度是必由之路。通过分析当前有关劳动教养制度改革设想的三种模式(单独立法、易名立法、吸收立法)，得出结论：目前，单独立法条件不成熟，仓促设立一部劳动教养法只会令劳动教养再次陷入没有明确法律性质和法律地位的尴尬境地。我国劳动教养与西方保安处分具有很大的区别，易名立法行不通。吸收立法是可行的，即可以将劳动教养纳入刑法的轨道，而且一定要在刑法里找到它最合适的位置。既而提出自己有关劳动教养刑法化的构想：我国现行刑罚体系完整，结构合理，如果将劳动教养 作为刑罚方法，会破坏现有的刑罚结构的完整性，最好是作为一种非刑罚方 法纳入刑罚典。本文最后论述了劳动教养作为非刑罚方法在适用对象、适用 程序、执行方式等方面区别于主刑的举措。 为了淡化犯罪给曾经犯罪人带来的消极影响，使曾经犯罪人能够更好 地复归社会，我国刑法中有必要引入前科消灭制度。 结论 劳动教养历经近五十年的风雨，在历史上发挥了自己的作用， 纳入刑法后，，消除它的消极因素，使劳动教养发挥更大的作用。
[Abstract]:The system of reeducation through labor has played an important role in maintaining public order and preventing crime since its birth in 1950's. However, with the development of society, its malpractice is becoming more and more obvious, and the reform of re-education through labor system has become a hot and difficult issue, so it is of great practical significance to study it. The text consists of three parts. The first part summarizes the history and development of the system of reeducation through labor, as well as the applicable object and procedure of reeducation through labor. The second part: an analysis of the nature of reeducation through labor, including administrative coercive measures, administrative penalties, criminal penalties, security measures, and correctional departments. Based on the analysis of these viewpoints, this paper points out the shortcomings of these viewpoints, and analyzes the differences between security measures and reeducation through labor. This paper holds that the present system of reeducation through labor has the nature of both criminal punishment and administrative punishment. Only through reform, can reeducation through labor have a clear nature and legal status. The third part: the perfection of the reform of re-education through labor clearly points out the necessity of reeducation through labor, but because it does have many defects, the reform of the system of re-education through labor is the only way. Based on the analysis of the three models (separate legislation, renamed legislation, absorption legislation) of the current reform of the re-education through labor system, it is concluded that, at present, the conditions for separate legislation are not mature. The hasty establishment of a reeducation through labor law will only lead to the embarrassing situation of no clear legal nature and legal status. There is a great difference between reeducation through labor and security measures in western countries. It is feasible to absorb legislation, that is, to bring re-education through labor into the track of criminal law, and must find its most suitable position in criminal law. Therefore, the author puts forward his own conception about the criminal law of reeducation through labor: the present penalty system of our country is complete, the structure is reasonable, if we take reeducation through labor as the penalty method, It would undermine the integrity of the existing penal structure, preferably as a non-penal party to the penal code. In the end, the paper discusses that reeducation through labor as a non-penalty method is different from the main punishment in terms of applicable object, applicable procedure, execution mode and so on. In order to desalinate the negative influence of the crime on the former offenders and enable the former criminals to return to the society better, it is necessary to introduce the system of elimination of criminal record in the criminal law of our country. Conclusion after nearly 50 years of wind and rain, reeducation through labor has played its own role in history. After it was brought into criminal law, it eliminated its negative factors and made the reeducation through labor play a greater role.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2002
【分类号】：D926.8
本文编号：2330843
[Abstract]:The system of reeducation through labor has played an important role in maintaining public order and preventing crime since its birth in 1950's. However, with the development of society, its malpractice is becoming more and more obvious, and the reform of re-education through labor system has become a hot and difficult issue, so it is of great practical significance to study it. The text consists of three parts. The first part summarizes the history and development of the system of reeducation through labor, as well as the applicable object and procedure of reeducation through labor. The second part: an analysis of the nature of reeducation through labor, including administrative coercive measures, administrative penalties, criminal penalties, security measures, and correctional departments. Based on the analysis of these viewpoints, this paper points out the shortcomings of these viewpoints, and analyzes the differences between security measures and reeducation through labor. This paper holds that the present system of reeducation through labor has the nature of both criminal punishment and administrative punishment. Only through reform, can reeducation through labor have a clear nature and legal status. The third part: the perfection of the reform of re-education through labor clearly points out the necessity of reeducation through labor, but because it does have many defects, the reform of the system of re-education through labor is the only way. Based on the analysis of the three models (separate legislation, renamed legislation, absorption legislation) of the current reform of the re-education through labor system, it is concluded that, at present, the conditions for separate legislation are not mature. The hasty establishment of a reeducation through labor law will only lead to the embarrassing situation of no clear legal nature and legal status. There is a great difference between reeducation through labor and security measures in western countries. It is feasible to absorb legislation, that is, to bring re-education through labor into the track of criminal law, and must find its most suitable position in criminal law. Therefore, the author puts forward his own conception about the criminal law of reeducation through labor: the present penalty system of our country is complete, the structure is reasonable, if we take reeducation through labor as the penalty method, It would undermine the integrity of the existing penal structure, preferably as a non-penal party to the penal code. In the end, the paper discusses that reeducation through labor as a non-penalty method is different from the main punishment in terms of applicable object, applicable procedure, execution mode and so on. In order to desalinate the negative influence of the crime on the former offenders and enable the former criminals to return to the society better, it is necessary to introduce the system of elimination of criminal record in the criminal law of our country. Conclusion after nearly 50 years of wind and rain, reeducation through labor has played its own role in history. After it was brought into criminal law, it eliminated its negative factors and made the reeducation through labor play a greater role.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2002
【分类号】：D926.8
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前5条
1 皮纯协,王毅;试论劳动教养制度的改革与完善[J];法学杂志;2000年03期
2 刘健,赖建云;论我国劳动教养制度与国际人权公约的冲突及其调整——对免于强迫劳动权的剖析[J];法学评论;2001年05期
3 姜金方;劳动教养立法争议的由来、问题及出路[J];法学;2001年05期
4 陈兴良;劳动教养:根据国际人权公约之分析[J];法学;2001年10期
5 储槐植;刑罚现代化:刑法修改的价值定向[J];法学研究;1997年01期
本文编号：2330843
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/gongan/2330843.html
