Please wait a minute...
档案学研究  2015, Vol. 29 Issue (5): 54-59    DOI: 10.16065/j.cnki.issn1002-1620.2015.05.008
档案法规标准     
《档案法》与《刑法》衔接视域下档案犯罪刑事责任重构
仝其宪
安徽大学法学院 安徽合肥 23060。忻州师范学院法律系 山西忻州 034000
Reconstruction of Criminal Responsibility in Archive Crimes from the Perspective of Cohesion of Archives Law and Criminal Law
Qixian Tong
Law School,Anhui University, Hefei, 23060
Law Department,Xinzhou Normal College, Xinzhou, 034000
 全文: PDF(749 KB)   HTML
摘要:

《刑法》对档案安全保护的相关规定在立法的修改中不断趋于完善。但随着社会经济的发展,档案违法犯罪呈现出多样化特点,使得原有的《刑法》对档案犯罪的规制,从罪名设置和构成要件等方面逐渐暴露出诸多缺陷与不足。建议从《档案法》与《刑法》的衔接视域,根据刑法对档案犯罪行为规制的立法价值与目的,将档案犯罪的保护法益调整,不仅是国家对档案的管理制度,而且还包括公私档案的所有权;对档案犯罪定罪进行合理调整,适度扩大档案犯罪圈,将刑法尚未明确的犯罪行为予以刑法规制,重新架构档案犯罪的刑事责任体系,以有效地发挥刑法的保护与保障功能。

关键词: 档案犯罪法律归属法益保护刑事责任    
Abstract:

The relevant provisions of criminal law in the protection of archives security tend to be gradually improved. However, with the development of social economy, archive crimes show diverse characteristics and some detects and shortcomings have appeared in the original criminal law on the regulation of archive crimes. From the perspective of cohesion of archives law and criminal law, according to the legislative value and purpose of criminal law on the archive crime regulation, the paper suggests that the adjustment of protecting interests of archive crimes should be performed not only in the archives management system of the state, but also in the ownership of public and private archives; rational adjustment of archive crime conviction, moderate expansion of archive-related criminal bound, crime behaviors which are not definite in criminal law should fit into the regulations of criminal law and the criminal responsibility system of archive crimes should be reconstructed in order to effectively exert the protection and safeguard function of criminal law.

Key words: Archive crimes    Legal ownership    Law interest protection    Criminal responsibility
出版日期: 2017-11-16
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  
仝其宪

引用本文:

仝其宪. 《档案法》与《刑法》衔接视域下档案犯罪刑事责任重构[J]. 档案学研究, 2015, 29(5): 54-59.

Qixian Tong. Reconstruction of Criminal Responsibility in Archive Crimes from the Perspective of Cohesion of Archives Law and Criminal Law. Archives Science Study, 2015, 29(5): 54-59.

链接本文:

http://daxyj.idangan.cn/CN/10.16065/j.cnki.issn1002-1620.2015.05.008        http://daxyj.idangan.cn/CN/Y2015/V29/I5/54

[1] 牧晓阳. 论我国档案犯罪的立法完善[J].兰台世界,2010(18):29-30.
[2] 高铭暄,马克昌.刑法学(第五版)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,高等教育出版社,2011:570.
[3] 许桂敏. 文物安全刑法保护的不足与完善[J].学术交流,2014(8):93-97.null 张全胜. 档案犯罪基本问题研究[M].档案学研究,2012(4):28-33.
[5] 张穹. 新刑法罪与非罪、此罪与彼罪的界限[M].北京:中国检察出版社,1998:353.
[6] 叶峰. 刑法新罪名通论[M].北京:中国检察出版社,1997:259.
[7] 周光权. 刑法各论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008:427.
[8] 郭立新,杨迎泽.刑法分则适用疑难问题解释[M].北京:中国检察出版社,2010:322.
[9] 张全胜. 档案犯罪基本问题研究[M].档案学研究,2012(4):28-33.
[10] 张明楷. 刑法分则的解释原理(第2版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011:44-45.
[11] 连志英,倪东风.档案犯罪若干问题的分析[J].档案学通讯,2006(1):26-29.
[12] 储槐植. 刑事一体化论要[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2007:115.
No related articles found!