权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

The historical research on the leagal statuses and privileges of the bureaucrats in pre-modern China

近代中国官僚法律地位与特权的历史研究

基本信息

批准号：
07451081
负责人：
YASUDA Jiro
金额：
$ 3.78万
依托单位：
Tohoku Univ.
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)
财政年份：
1995
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
1995 至 1997
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

We have approached to the matter entitled avove through the investigation of the system of Pa-i ** which is the privilege bestowed on the bureaucrats concerning the criminal code. Some of important results are as follows ;1. The first instance was 200B.C, when the first Emperor of the Former Han ** dynasty gave the privileges to his close attendants. Afterward the extent of bureaucrats given this privileges Was gradually expanded. In 27A.D.district magistrators at the lowest rank were allowed too.2. We can conclude from the analysis of concrete cases that already in the Tai-shin Statutes *** edited in 268A.D., the procedures on Pa-i were regulated as in the Tang Statutes **.3. The criticism on Pa-i such as "it only leaves the gigantic wickedmen free" shows how frequently this system was practiced and how enormous its evil effects were under flue Western Chin ** dynasty.4. From the second half of fourth century on, we cannot find its practices anymore. But heavy punishment for the bureaucrats were not made by the Public Execution but by the Allowed Suicide in most cases. in this fact we can see some influence of Pa-i.5. From the first, this system did not apply to serious crimes such as the plot against the Emperor or the State, and procedurally the judicial officer's application of Pa-i required the Emperor's approval. These facts indicate that the Emperor could very often interfere in the practices of this system. So this penal privileges for the bureaucrats were simply unstable. In the Tang period when the power of the Emperor was strengthened, therefore, an bureaucrat insisted that the adherence of Pa-i system was nothing but protection of their inalienable rights.

本文通过对刑法典赋予官僚特权-“保”的制度的考察，探讨了“保”的问题。主要结果如下：1.第一次是在公元前200年，当时，前汉的第一个皇帝把特权给了他的亲信。后来，官僚享有这种特权的范围逐渐扩大。在公元27年，最低级别的地区官员也被允许。我们可以从具体案例的分析中得出结论，在公元268年编辑的《台新法规》中，有关巴邑的程序，按《唐律》** 规定。对八旗的“只留大恶人自由”等批评，说明了这种制度在西晋时期的频繁实施和其恶劣影响的巨大。从世纪后半期开始，我们就再也找不到它的实践了。但对官吏的重刑，大多不是通过公刑，而是通过“自杀”。在这一事实中，我们可以看到Pa-i.5影响。从一开始，这一制度就不适用于严重的罪行，如阴谋反对皇帝或国家，在程序上，司法官员的申请需要皇帝的批准。这些事实表明，皇帝可以经常干预这一制度的实践。所以官僚们的刑罚特权是不稳定的。因此，在皇权加强的唐代，官僚们坚持认为，坚持百夷制度只是为了保护他们不可剥夺的权利。