摘要
宣扬恐怖主义罪的立法体现出刑事立法中自由与安全之间的紧张关系。风险社会理论与抽象危险犯理论虽然回答了“自由为何应当让位于安全”,但忽视了“自由为何愿意让位于安全”这一问题。敌人刑法理论与法律家长主义从保护视角为宣扬恐怖主义行为的处罚必要性提供了进一步的理论支撑。语义学视野下的概念比较无助于明晰宣扬行为的规范构造,应当在语用学视野下对其进行解构。根据言语行为理论,宣扬行为可以分为话语行为层面的传播、话语施事行为层面的“传播+赞扬”与话语施效行为层面的“传播+赞美+劝服”三个层次。对于第一层次的宣扬应当通过行政处罚进行规制,有利于实现行刑有效衔接、符合比例原则,同时避免犯罪人“标签化”。对于宣扬恐怖主义罪与煽动实施恐怖活动罪,可以借助“劝服”这一要素进行区分,若具有“劝服”这一要素,则构成间接故意下的煽动实施恐怖活动罪。在戏谑言语场合中应当结合具体语境,通过考察行为人的一贯表现进行行为的适格性判断。同时需要将“宣扬恐怖主义物品”从“恐怖物品”中分离,以限缩本罪适用范围。
The legislation on the crime of advocating terrorism reflects the tension between freedom and security in criminal legislation.While the Risk Society Theory and the abstract endangerment offense theory explain"why freedom should yield to security,"they neglect the question of"why freedom is willing to yield to security."The enemy criminal law theory and legal paternalism provide further theoretical support for the necessity of penalizing terrorism-advocating behaviors from a protective perspective.Comparative conceptual analysis under semantic frameworks fails to clarify the normative structure of advocacy acts;instead,such acts should be deconstructed through a pragmatic lens.Drawing on speech act theory,advocacy behaviors can be divided into three levels:dissemination at the locutionary act level("spreading"),"dissemination+praise"at the illocutionary act level,and"dissemination+praise+persuasion"at the perlocutionary act level.Advocacy at the first level should be regulated through administrative penalties,which facilitates effective administrative-penal coordination,aligns with the principle of proportionality,and avoids stigmatizing offenders.The distinction between the crime of advocating terrorism and the crime of inciting terrorist activities can be drawn based on the presence of the"persuasion"element:if persuasion exists,it constitutes incitement to commit terrorist activities under indirect intent.In jocular speech contexts,the appropriateness of such acts should be evaluated by considering the specific context and the speaker's consistent behavior.Additionally,"terrorism-advocating materials"should be distinguished from"terrorist materials"to narrow the scope of this offense.
作者
付玉明
焦建峰
FU Yuming;JIAO Jianfeng(Northwest University of Political Science and Law,Xi'an Shaanxi 710063,China)
出处
《法学论坛》
北大核心
2025年第3期115-126,共12页
Legal Forum
关键词
宣扬恐怖主义罪
风险社会
敌人刑法
言语行为理论
crime of advocating terrorism
risk society
enemy criminal law
theory of speech-acts
