恶意补足年龄在我国适用的可行性分析
Feasibility Analysis of Maliciously Supplementing Age in China
摘要: 近年来,我国未成年人犯罪呈现低龄化与恶性化趋势,但现行刑事责任年龄制度因刚性规定难以有效应对。2021年《刑法修正案(十一)》虽将个别犯罪的追诉年龄降至12周岁,但仍存在法律空白,如对未满12周岁但具有严重主观恶性的未成年人缺乏规制依据。在此背景下,引入英美法系的“恶意补足年龄”规则,通过个案审查认定低龄未成年人的刑事责任能力,具有重要的理论与实践价值。本文从立法、司法与社会三个维度分析该规则本土化的可行性:立法上,我国已通过《刑法修正案(十一)》探索弹性年龄规则;司法上,最高检核准追诉程序为恶意认定提供实践基础;社会上,公众对极端恶性案件的治理诉求日益强烈。然而,该规则仍需解决证明标准模糊、司法裁量权扩张及矫治成本过高等问题。建议通过明确“恶意”认定标准、构建分级证明机制、优化矫治体系等方式推进制度本土化,以实现未成年人保护与社会公平的平衡。
Abstract: In recent years, juvenile delinquency in China has shown a trend of younger age and malignancy, but the current age of criminal responsibility system is difficult to effectively respond to due to rigid regulations. Although the 2021 Amendment to the Criminal Law (XI) lowered the age of prosecution for certain crimes to 12 years old, there are still legal gaps, such as a lack of regulatory basis for minors under 12 years old who have serious subjective malice. In this context, the introduction of the “malicious age supplement” rule in the Anglo American legal system and the determination of the criminal responsibility of underage minors through case review have important theoretical and practical value. This article analyzes the feasibility of localizing this rule from three dimensions: legislation, judiciary, and society. In terms of legislation, China has explored flexible age rules through the Eleventh Amendment to the Criminal Law; Legally, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate approves the prosecution procedure to provide a practical basis for malicious identification; In society, the public’s demand for governance of extremely malignant cases is becoming increasingly strong. However, the rule still needs to address issues such as vague proof standards, expansion of judicial discretion, and high costs of correction. It is suggested to promote the localization of the system by clarifying the criteria for identifying “malice”, establishing a graded proof mechanism, and optimizing the correctional system, in order to achieve a balance between the protection of minors and social equity.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
陈伟, 黄鑫. “恶意补足年龄”规则本土化适用探究[J]. 行政与法, 2021(11): 105-118.
|
|
[2]
|
马荣春, 高坤龙. 恶意补足年龄规则的起源、发展与中国化实践[J]. 争议解决, 2024, 10(8): 209-215.
|
|
[3]
|
国家统计局. 中国未成年人犯罪统计年鉴(2023) [M]. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2024.
|
|
[4]
|
最高人民法院. 未成年人检察工作白皮书(2021) [R]. 北京: 最高人民法院, 2022.
|
|
[5]
|
张乐缘. 恶意补足年龄规则的本土化适用研究[J]. 法学评论, 2024, 42(3): 89-97.
|
|
[6]
|
辛省志. 震慑未成年人犯罪, 可考虑“恶意补足年龄”规则[EB/OL]. 南方周末. https://www.infzm.com/contents/269486, 2024-04-11.
|
|
[7]
|
国务院. 中国儿童发展纲要(2021-2030年) [Z]. 2021-09-27.
|
|
[8]
|
普忠华. 我国确立恶意补足年龄的可行性分析[J]. 青少年与法, 2020(4): 45-52.
|
|
[9]
|
李梦. 英美法系恶意补足年龄规则的学理分析及对我国的启示[J]. 湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 24(4): 128-138.
|