【正文】
學(xué)者有不同的主張,主要觀點(diǎn)有本罪主觀方面只能是故意;本罪主觀方面既可以是故意,也可以是過失;本罪主觀方面只能是過失;本罪的主觀方面包括故意、過失和無(wú)過失。但是重大環(huán)境污染事故罪在理論和司法實(shí)踐中都存在很多問題。人們?cè)谙硎芄I(yè)生產(chǎn)給社會(huì)聚集的巨大財(cái)富,給生活帶來(lái)的便利和舒適的同時(shí),人們所賴以生存的自然環(huán)境卻在遭受著空前的污染和破壞。司法實(shí)踐中,對(duì)違反國(guó)家規(guī)定的行為和嚴(yán)重后果持故意的行為,不構(gòu)成本罪而應(yīng)根據(jù)其行為的主客觀要件等犯罪事實(shí),依據(jù)刑法的其他規(guī)定如投放危險(xiǎn)物質(zhì)罪定罪處罰。作為客觀歸罪的絕對(duì)責(zé)任應(yīng)排除在本罪主觀方面之外。環(huán)境污染具有眾多特殊性,為了應(yīng)對(duì)這種特殊性,更好地打擊環(huán)境犯罪,維護(hù)公共利益和保護(hù)公民的合法權(quán)益,重大環(huán)境污染事故罪主觀方面的認(rèn)定中應(yīng)引進(jìn)嚴(yán)格責(zé)任。研究重大環(huán)境污染事故罪畢業(yè)論文目 錄摘要……………………………………………………………………1關(guān) 鍵 詞………………………………………………………………1Abstract………………………………………………………………1Key words……………………………………………………………1引言…………………………………………………………………2一、重大環(huán)境污染事故罪主觀方面觀點(diǎn)述評(píng)……………………2(一)重大環(huán)境污染事故罪主觀方面觀點(diǎn)概述…………………2(二)重大環(huán)境污染事故罪主觀方面諸觀點(diǎn)評(píng)析………………2二、本罪主觀方面:排除故意……………………………………3(一)本罪主觀方面案例…………………………………………3(二)本罪主觀方面案例評(píng)析……………………………………3三、本罪主觀方面:過失和推定過失……………………………4(一)過失:本罪的主觀方面……………………………………5(二)推定過失……………………………………………………5四、嚴(yán)格責(zé)任于本罪之適用………………………………………6(一)嚴(yán)格責(zé)任和絕對(duì)責(zé)任之辨析………………………………6(二)本罪適用嚴(yán)格責(zé)任之爭(zhēng)議…………………………………6五、嚴(yán)格責(zé)任適用本罪之限制……………………………………9(一)辯護(hù)理由對(duì)嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的限制………………………………9(二)證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的限制………………………………9(三)刑罰適用對(duì)嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的限制………………………………9(四)罪刑法定對(duì)嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的限制………………………………10結(jié)語(yǔ)…………………………………………………………………10參考文獻(xiàn)……………………………………………………………11附錄…………………………………………………………………12附件一………………………………………………………………12附件二………………………………………………………………17致謝…………………………………………………………………21摘要:重大環(huán)境污染事故罪的主觀方面應(yīng)排除故意,而包括過失和推定過失。英美法系的嚴(yán)格責(zé)任和我國(guó)民法的過錯(cuò)推定實(shí)質(zhì)是一致的,它沒有違背主客觀相統(tǒng)一原則,沒有否認(rèn)罪過作為犯罪構(gòu)成的必要構(gòu)成要素,它仍是過錯(cuò)責(zé)任的一部分。故本罪的主觀方面應(yīng)當(dāng)以過錯(cuò)責(zé)任為原則、以嚴(yán)格責(zé)任為輔助。完善現(xiàn)行刑法對(duì)本罪之規(guī)定,應(yīng)就適用嚴(yán)格責(zé)任作出明文規(guī)定,并對(duì)嚴(yán)格責(zé)任作出一定的限制如允許辯護(hù)理由的存在。關(guān)鍵詞:重大環(huán)境污染事故罪 主觀方面 嚴(yán)格責(zé)任 絕對(duì)責(zé)任 推定過失 Abstract: The subjective aspects of the crime of great environmental pollution accident should remove intent, but including fault and constructive fault. The strict liability in the mon law is consistent with the essence of fault deduce in our civil law, which does not go against the principle of subjective aspect according to objective aspect, does not deny subjective fault as a necessary element posing a crime, is still a part of the fault liability. Environmental pollution has a lot of particularity, for dealing with this kind of particularity, better striking environment crime, safeguarding the public interests and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, it is necessary for us to introduce the strict responsibility to the crime of great environmental pollution accident. So referring to the subject aspect of this crime, fault liability should be applied firstly, auxiliary the strict liability. Absolute liability should be excluded from the criminal law for its nature of objective should make it clear in the criminal Law that this crime can apply to strict liability and the limit to it such as allowing the presence of defense. In judicial practice, for the case that the defendant holds intent not only to the behavior violating country regulation but also to the serious consequences, it does not pose this crime,we should convict the right crime as what it should be according to subjective and objective aspects,such as the crime of putting hazardous substances. Key words: crime of great environmental pollution accident/ subjective aspect/ strict liability/ absolute liability/ constructive fault12引 言隨著社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的飛速發(fā)展,工業(yè)生產(chǎn)水平也得到極大提高。為了打擊環(huán)境犯罪,保護(hù)廣大公民的生命健康、公私財(cái)產(chǎn)的安全,97年《刑法》在第六章妨害社會(huì)管理秩序罪中的第六節(jié)專設(shè)了破壞環(huán)境資源罪,規(guī)定了一系列污染環(huán)境和破壞自然資源的犯罪,其中第338條重大環(huán)境污染事故罪就是非常重要的一條。首先,關(guān)于它的主觀方面的認(rèn)定就存在很多爭(zhēng)議。筆者對(duì)這些觀點(diǎn)均不敢茍同,本文的相應(yīng)部分將對(duì)其進(jìn)行研究和評(píng)析。而另有學(xué)者主張應(yīng)根據(jù)其行為的主客觀要件,依據(jù)刑法的其他規(guī)定定罪處罰。再次,由于環(huán)境污染有其特殊性,即其具有專業(yè)性、技術(shù)性、長(zhǎng)期性、隱蔽性、后果嚴(yán)重性和難