非法採礦罪的關鍵問題

由於行政管理上對採礦權許可證實行嚴格審批，司法實務上就存在僅根據行政違法認定非法採礦罪的衝動，這種放棄刑法所固有的違法性進行判斷的現狀亟需改變。非法採礦罪的保護法益是礦產資源及其合理利用，以及國家對礦產資源的財產所有權。單純侵害礦產資源管理制度或管理秩序的行為難以構成本罪。對採礦許可證到期後的開採行為，“試運轉”批復過期至正式取得採礦許可證之間“空檔期”採礦的行為，以及特殊情形下的工程性採礦行為，均難以肯定其法益侵害性。在確定行為人是否屬於“未取得採礦許可證”時，需要進行實質判斷，前置法所允許的採礦權承包、採礦權合作經營都不屬於未取得採礦許可證的情形，不宜以本罪論處。在個別案件中，有必要結合被告人無證開採行為事先諮詢過礦產資源主管機關或長期得到地方政府及相關主管部門認可或支持的事實，認定行為人的違法性認識錯誤不可避免，欠缺本罪的違法性認識可能性，從而排除其責任。

In judicial practice, due to the strict examination and approval of mining right license by the gov-ernment, there is an impulse to determine the crime of illegal mining only on the basis of administrative illegali-ty in practice. The current situation of giving up the illegality inherent in the criminal law urgently needs to be changed. The legal interests of the crime of illegal mining are mineral resources and their rational utilization, as well as the property ownership of mineral resources by the state. It is difficult to constitute this crime by simply infringing upon the mineral resources management system or administrative order. For the mining activities after the expiration of the mining license, the mining behavior of the 'gap period' between the expiration of the 4'tri-al operation' approval and the formal acquisition of the mining license, and the engineering mining behavior un-der special circumstances, it is difficult to affirm the infringement of the aforementioned legal interests. When determining whether the prosecuted action constitutes 'not obtaining a mining license', it is necessary to make a substantive judgment. The mining right contracting and cooperative operation allowed by the law does not con-stitute 'not obtaining a mining license' and should not be punished as such a crime. In individual cases, it is necessary to consider the fact that the defendant has consulted the competent authority of mineral resources in advance or has been recognized or supported by the local government and relevant competent departments for a long time in the act of mining without a license, and to find that the prohibition error of the actor is inevitable and the suspect lacks the possibility of understanding the illegality of this crime, so as to rule out criminal responsibility.