档案犯罪刑事惩治研究：反思与重构—— 基于最高人民法院公布案件的实证分析

doi:10.16065/j.cnki.issn1002-1620.2020.05.006

档案学研究

2020, Vol. 34

Issue (5): 44-49 DOI: 10.16065/j.cnki.issn1002-1620.2020.05.006

档案法规标准

本期目录 | 过刊浏览

档案犯罪刑事惩治研究：反思与重构—— 基于最高人民法院公布案件的实证分析

姚明

铜陵学院法学院铜陵 244061

Research on the Criminal Punishment of Archival Crimes: Reflection and Reconstruction—— Based on the Empirical Analysis of Cases Pronounced by the Supreme People’s Court

YAO Ming

Law School,Tongling University,Tongling 244061

输出:BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要: 确保档案安全需要《刑法》的有力保护。通过对我国档案犯罪案件刑事惩治的实证考察发现,当前还存在刑事立法缺乏规制的全面性,保护范围较窄;刑事司法缺乏制裁的严厉性,惩治力度较轻等问题。严重的故意毁损档案,伪造、变造档案,档案保管失职以及侵害非国有档案等达到刑法法理所要求的具有严重社会危害性的侵害档案行为目前并未纳入《刑法》予以规制。未来,应在结合我国档案保护实际,并参考借鉴域外档案犯罪刑事惩治经验的基础上,通过尽快修复档案犯罪立法漏洞,切实提升档案犯罪司法裁判力度等方式来增强我国档案犯罪刑事惩治质效。

Abstract：To ensure the security of archives needs the strong protection of Criminal Law. Through the empirical investigation of the criminal punishment of archives crime cases in China, it is found that there are still some problems at present. These problems include the lack of comprehensive criminal legislation and the narrow scope of protection, the lack of severity of punishment in criminal justice, and the light punishment and so on. Serious intentional damage to archives, forgery and alteration of archives, dereliction of duty of archives custody and infringement of non-state-owned archives, which meet the requirements of criminal law but not regulated in it. In the future, on the basis of combining the reality of archives protection in China and referring to the experience of criminal punishment for archival crimes extraterritorial, we should improve the quality and effectiveness of criminal punishment for archival crimes in China by repairing the loopholes in legislation of archival crime as soon as possible, and effectively enhancing the judicial judgment of archival crime.

出版日期: 2020-10-28

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章

引用本文:

姚明. 档案犯罪刑事惩治研究：反思与重构—— 基于最高人民法院公布案件的实证分析[J]. 档案学研究, 2020, 34(5): 44-49.
YAO Ming. Research on the Criminal Punishment of Archival Crimes: Reflection and Reconstruction—— Based on the Empirical Analysis of Cases Pronounced by the Supreme People’s Court. Archives Science Study, 2020, 34(5): 44-49.

链接本文:

http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_dax/CN/10.16065/j.cnki.issn1002-1620.2020.05.006 或 http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_dax/CN/Y2020/V34/I5/44

[1] 安徽临泉一退役军人被曝档案丢失当地已成立调查组[EB/OL].凤凰网.http://news.ifeng.com/c/7sVgO1utT8C,2019-12-18/2019-12-16.
[2] 利用者私自涂改档案[EB/OL].中国档案资讯网. http://www.zgdazxw.com.cn/news/2015-05/07/content_97682.htm,2015-05-07/2019-12-16.
[3] 任彦君. 论我国刑法漏洞之填补[J].法商研究,2015(4):101-110.
[4] 徐振华. 犯罪对象研究[M].南宁:广西人民出版社,2006:51-53.
[5] 张文显等. 法理学[M].北京:人民出版社,高等教育出版社,2010:310.
[6] 谷永超. 困境与出路:我国档案犯罪实体性行刑衔接制度之思考[J].档案学研究,2018(5):23-26.
[7] 蒋天雪. 档案保管失职行为及其法律责任研究[J].兰台世界,2013(6):80-81.
[8] 王的. 从立法思想看非国有档案立法的完善[J].机电兵船档案,2014(5):24-26.
[9] 瑞典刑法典[M]瑞典刑法典[M].陈琴,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2005:23.
[10] 芬兰刑法典[M]芬兰刑法典[M].肖怡,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2005:93-94.
[11] (日)西田典之.日本刑法各论[M].刘明详,王昭武,译. 北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007:285-294.
[12] 尼日利亚刑法[M]尼日利亚刑法[M].张旭辉,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2003:134-138.
[13] 英国刑事制定法精要[M]英国刑事制定法精要[M].谢望原,刘涛,张雅等译.北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2003:279.
[14] (美)罗伯特·考特,托马斯·尤伦.法和经济学[M].张军,译.上海:上海人民出版社,1994:750.
[15] 关昕. 我国缓刑制度适用的现实困境与完善举措[J].江西社会科学,2018(11):186-194.
[16] 赵德刚等. 刑法[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2011:4-5.
[17] 高铭暄. 刑法学[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2010:9.
[18] 孙航.第七次全国刑事审判工作会议闭幕[N].人民法院报,2019-10-19(001).

No related articles found!

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed