摘要
文章考察了严格责任的涵义,将严格责任界定为即使被告人的行为不具有犯罪所必需的主观罪过,即使被告人具有不可避免的合理错误,被告人的行为仍得定罪,以此区别于举证责任倒置的严格责任。通过对英美国家适用严格责任的具体情况的考察,笔者认为真正适用严格责任定罪的是极其例外的情况,适用严格责任的犯罪行为更加类似于民事侵权行为。从本质上看,对不具有主观罪过的行为人适用刑事责任是不必要的,是反人性的,是无效的。
This article points out that strict liability means that even if a defendant doesn＇t commit a crime purposefully, he will still be convicted. This kind of strict liability is different from another strict liability in which the burden of proof is reversed. In fact,the number of cases which are trialed according to strict liability is very few, and most experts are against strict liability. The arthor thinks that an action that belongs to strict liability is just a kind of civil torl. Therefore, it is unnecessary for an offender who doesn＇t commit a purposeful crime to hold criminal liability.
出处
《江南大学学报（人文社会科学版）》
2006年第2期46-49,共4页
Journal of Jiangnan University：Humanities & Social Sciences Edition
关键词
严格责任
保障法
人性
功利
strict liability
guarantee law
human nature
utility
