在“公益”與“私權”之間：違法性認識問題再認識

Between'Public Interest and'Private Right': Rethinking on Criminal Illegality Cognition Theory

“違法性認識是否阻卻刑事責任”這一爭議問題的癥結是“公益”與“私權”的博弈。這裡的“公益”是“群體性的安全利益”，而“私權”則是指“不知法律不受刑罰處罰的權利”。考慮到當前人們對“被告是否具有違法性認識”的確證能力有限這一事實，根據平衡公益與私權的“最大程度保障私權”原則，違法性認識問題的解決方案應當是以“向群體性安全利益傾斜”為平衡模態的折衷方案。而具體的折衷方式應以“違法性認識欠缺是否可能避免”為關鍵點，將被告人的違法性認識欠缺區分為應阻卻刑事責任的違法性認識欠缺和不應阻卻刑事責任的違法性認識欠缺。

The sticking point of the argument on criminal illegality cognition question is the game between 'Public Interest' and 'Private Right' . Specifically, the related 'Public Interest' here is group's security interest; the 'Private right' is individual's right of 'no punishment if one did not know the rule' . Concerning the limited capability to authenticate whether defendant knew the rule, and according to the 'maximizing private right' principle on balancing 'Public Interest' and 'Private Right' , the resolution of criminal illegality cognition question should be a trade-off decision the basis of an equilibrium state placing emphasis on the community security interests. Its specific formulation is plausibly to select 'whether the unknown to rule is avoidable' as key point, and divide 'unknown to rule' to punishable and unpunishable.