|
|
|
| On the Essence of Order-related Legal Interests |
| He Peixi |
| Criminal Legal Science Research Center, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Legal interests represent the unity of value and existence, serving as necessary conditions for the development of individual freedom from a value theory perspective, and as objective existences that can undergo causal changes from an ontological perspective. Based on this premise, the existing analyses within China’s criminal law theory on the essence of order-related legal interests have their limitations. The issue with the state management order theory is that not all state-managed orders are necessary conditions for the development of individual freedom, which does not meet the requirements from the perspective of legal interest value theory. Although the purposive reductionism within order reduction theory recognizes the requirements from the value theory perspective of legal interests, it fails to further explore the ontological basis of order-related legal interests, leading to a degradation of these interests into purely ideological guidance. The personal interest reductionism within order reduction theory, while reducing the ontological basis of order-related legal interests to personal interests in life, health, or property, not only overcorrects but also negates the significance of the existence of order-related legal interests themselves.Orders can be divided into externally enforced orders and spontaneously generated orders. Externally enforced orders cannot meet the requirements from the value theory perspective of legal interests, and thus cannot become eligible legal interests worthy of protection by criminal law. Only when a state-managed orderly status also belongs to a spontaneously generated orderly status among individuals, can it meet the requirements from the value theory perspective of legal interests, becoming order-related legal interests worthy of protection by criminal law. The ontological basis of order-related legal interests lies in the psychological willingness of unspecified individuals who may enter a particular order domain, after rational assessment, to shape a certain order according to the behavior patterns they recognize. This psychological willingness is an objective existence that can undergo causal changes, thereby meeting the requirements from the ontological perspective of legal interests.Based on the essential characteristics of order-related legal interests, we can further construct the judgment rules to judge whether the order-related interests are infringed. (1) The Order-related legal interests are inter-subjective interests. The subject of order-related legal interests is not a specific individual but any unspecified individual who may enter a particular order domain. Therefore, it is necessary to judge whether order-related legal interests have been infringed upon from the standpoint of these unspecified individuals within the order domain. (2) Order-related legal interests are public interests. Order-related legal interests arise from unspecified individuals who may enter a particular order domain, thus only actions entering the relevant public domain can infringe upon order-related legal interests. (3) Order-related legal interests are subject to change. The psychological willingness of unspecified individuals within a particular order domain may change with social conditions, requiring legislators and judiciary to evaluate the psychological willingness of these individuals in line with the contemporary society. These rules can help legislators assess the legislative legitimacy of laws concerning order-related crimes and also assist judges in reasonably defining the scope of application of laws in such cases.
|
|
Received: 15 December 2023
|
|
|
|
1 伊藤研祐：『法益概念史研究』，東京：成文堂，1984年。
2 伊藤研祐：『刑法講義総論』，東京：日本評論社，2010年。
3 钟宏彬：《法益理论的宪法基础》，台北：元照出版有限公司，2012年。
4 张明楷：《刑法学》，北京：法律出版社，2021年。
5 周漾沂：《从实质法概念重新定义法益：以法主体性论述为基础》，《台大法学论丛》2012年第3期，第981-1053页。
6 德］克劳斯·罗克辛：《对批判立法之法益概念的检视》，陈璇译，《法学评论》2015年第1期，第53-67页。
7 高铭暄、马克昌主编：《刑法学》，北京：北京大学出版社、高等教育出版社，2022年。
8 何荣功：《经济自由与刑法理性：经济刑法的范围界定》，《法律科学》2014年第3期，第44-56页。
9 钱小平：《中国金融刑法立法的应然转向：从“秩序法益观”到“利益法益观”》，《政治与法律》2017年第5期，第37-47页。
10 张明楷：《集体法益的刑法保护》，《法学评论》2023年第1期，第44-58页。
11 何荣功：《经济自由与经济刑法正当性的体系思考》，《法学评论》2014年第6期，第56-67页。
12 熊琦：《刑法教义学视阈内外的贿赂犯罪法益——基于中德比较研究与跨学科视角的综合分析》，《法学评论》2015年第6期，第122-133页。
13 张明楷：《避免将行政违法认定为刑事犯罪：理念、方法与路径》，《中国法学》2017年第4期，第37-56页。
14 胡永方：《应增设破坏计划生育罪》，《现代法学》1989年第6期，第63-64页。
15 奥］卡尔·门格尔：《经济学方法论探究》，姚中秋译，北京：新星出版社，2007年。
16 邓正来：《社会秩序规则二元观——哈耶克法律理论的研究》，见《北大法律评论》编辑委员会编：《北大法律评论》第2卷第2辑，北京：法律出版社，2000年，第395-445页。
17 美］E.博登海默：《法理学：法律哲学与法律方法》，邓正来译，北京：中国政法大学出版社，2004年。
18 德］乌尔斯·金德霍伊泽尔：《论欧洲法学思想中秩序的概念》，陈璇译，《中外法学》2017年第4期，第1102-1110页。
19 李洁：《犯罪对象论》，北京：社会科学文献出版社，2018年。
20 陈璇：《法益概念与刑事立法正当性检验》，《比较法研究》2020年第3期，第51-72页。
21 车浩：《刑事立法的法教义学反思——基于〈刑法修正案（九）〉的分析》，《法学》2015年第10期，第3-16页。
22 高山佳奈子：「無資格活動罪における制度的法益」，『法学論叢』2022年190巻６号，1-23頁。
23 刘艳红：《轻罪时代我国应该进行非犯罪化刑事立法——写在〈刑法修正案（十二）〉颁布之际》，《比较法研究》2024年第1期，第21-35页。
24 叶良芳：《非法植入基因编辑、克隆胚胎罪的保护法益：基于生命伦理的视角》，《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2022年第7期，第34-48页。
25 姚万勤：《高利转贷罪除罪化实证研究》，《政治与法律》2018年第3期，第39-51页。
26 刘伟：《资本功能转变中的虚报注册资本罪》，《中国刑事法杂志》2008年第4期，第40-47页。 |
|
|
|
2025, Vol. 55 
