试论独立教唆罪的设立

教唆行为的错综复杂，无疑将教唆犯问题变成了刑法理论界极具争议的话题。我国《刑法》第29条规定：“教唆他人犯罪的，应当按照他在共同犯罪中所起的作用处罚。教唆不满十八周岁的人犯罪，应当从重处罚。如果被教唆的人没有犯被教唆的罪，对于教唆犯，可以从轻或者减轻处罚。”此种立法例存在明显欠妥之处，将两种不同类型的教唆犯规定在同一刑法条文当中，无疑会致使学界在研究教唆犯问题时分不清两者的界限。应采用比较研究的方法，将共犯教唆犯与非共犯教唆犯区分开来。由于目前教唆犯问题在立法上和实践中都存在诸多矛盾，应将非共犯教唆犯从刑法总则中的“共同犯罪”一章中独立出来，单独设立教唆罪，置于分则当中。

On the Establishment of Independent Crime of Solicitation

Abetting acts is one crime of the most difficult problems in controversial criminal law theory attribute to the complexity and uniqueness of abetting acts. As ruled in our Criminal Law 29th ： “Anyone who instigates another to commit a crime should be punished in accordance with the role he plays in a joint crime. The one who instigated juveniles （under eighteen years of age） commits a crime should be given a heavier punishment. If the person who abetted didn’t commit the instigated crime, the instigator may be given a lighter or mitigated punishment.” This clause of criminal law has many questionable, the academic theory in the study abettor will confuse the two, and then generates a lot of differences. As the current unreasonable instigator legislative provisions in our country, and the resulting many contradictions in the judicial practice, we proposed the accomplice fagin from ＆quot;common crime＆quot; chapter of the general provisions of criminal law in the independence, provide independent crime of solicitation, placed in the specific provisions. Hoping to provide some theoretical value and practical significance for the future instigator studies.