• 中国科学学与科技政策研究会
  • 中国科学院科技政策与管理科学研究所
  • 清华大学科学技术与社会研究中心
ISSN 1003-2053 CN 11-1805/G3

科学学研究 ›› 2020, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (4): 714-722.

• 技术创新与制度创新 • 上一篇    下一篇

科技创新风险的刑法规制:实践、理念与范式

王雅佳   

  1. 重庆大学法学院
  • 收稿日期:2019-05-30 修回日期:2019-10-14 出版日期:2020-04-15 发布日期:2020-05-01
  • 通讯作者: 王雅佳

Criminal Regulation of Science and Technology Innovation Risk: Practice, Idea and Paradigm

  • Received:2019-05-30 Revised:2019-10-14 Online:2020-04-15 Published:2020-05-01

摘要: 科技创新对于现代社会发展的重要性是不言而喻的,但科技创新过程中所带来的一系列风险及其危害性不容忽视,刑法规制作为一种惯常的风险治理工具也日益受到关注和重视。对我国刑法进行近距离观测,可以发现,限于“成文法立法的局限”与“罪刑法定原则的制约”,我国刑法在规制科技创新风险方面力有不逮。目前所具有的规制理念,注重科技创新优先意味着排斥刑法的干预,而注重刑法规制优先也会制约科学技术发展,因而平衡科技创新与刑法介入的时点成为正确解决该问题的关键。鉴于科学创新风险类型较多,因而在未来的规制过程中,一方面,可以通过客观归责理论对科技创新本身的风险进行区分和规制;另一方面,对于未来可能滥用科学技术的行为,应当增设“滥用科学技术罪”进行应对。

Abstract: The importance of technological innovation for the development of modern society is self-evident, but the series of risks and their harmfulness brought about by the process of scientific and technological innovation cannot be ignored. The practice of criminal regulations as a customary risk management tool is also receiving increasing attention. Close observation of China's criminal law can be found that China's criminal law is incapable of regulating the risks of scientific and technological innovation because of the "limitation of lawmaking of civil law" and "constraints of the principle of legality of crimes and punishments". At present, the concept of regulation, focusing on the priority of scientific and technological innovation means excluding the intervention of criminal law, and paying attention to the priority of criminal law system will also restrict the development of science and technology. Therefore, balancing the technological innovation and the time of criminal law’ intervention becomes the key to correctly solve this problem. In view of the large number of scientific innovation risks, in the future regulation process, on the one hand, the risk of science and technology innovation itself can be differentiated and regulated through objective imputation theory; on the other hand, the behavior that may abuse science and technology in the future should be added a “crime of abuse of science and technology” to respond.