作者： 张泽涛
作者介绍： 汕头大学法学院教授
出版日期：2026年6月9日
内容提要 当前理论与制度普遍将行刑反向衔接的适用范围限定于解决“不刑不罚”问题。然而，若司法机关在办案中发现因监管漏洞导致类罪频发时，应通过制发社会治理类检察建议与司法建议实现预防，这同样是反向衔接的应有之义。将反向衔接扩展至类罪预防，有助于构建治罪与治理并重的执法司法格局。实践中预防类罪式反向衔接虽既有零散的规范依据，也有指导性案例支撑，但仍面临制度依据不足、“两法衔接平台”信息共享不畅、内外主体协同困难、建议刚性欠缺等困境。应从学理上明确其制度定位、系统修改相关规范、完善衔接平台与配套保障机制、发布指导性案例，从而推动从个案办理到类罪预防的治理转型。
关键词 行刑反向衔接 预防类罪 监管漏洞 行刑共治 行刑一体化
Abstract: Current theory and system generally limit the scope of application of the reverse coordination between administrative enforcement and criminal justice to addressing the issue of ‘no criminal punishment, no administrative penalty’. However, when judicial authorities discover during case handling that regulatory loopholes have led to frequent occurrences of similar crimes, they should achieve crime prevention by issuing procuratorial and judicial suggestions on social governance, which should also be an inherent part of reverse coordination. Extending reverse coordination to the prevention of similar crimes helps establish a law enforcement and judicial framework that equally emphasizes punishment and governance. In practice, although reverse coordination for preventing similar crimes is supported by scattered normative provisions and guiding cases, it still faces challenges such as insufficient institutional basis, poor information sharing on the ‘Administrative-Criminal Legal Coordination Platform’, difficulties in coordinating internal and external actors, and lack of enforceability of suggestions. It is necessary to clarify its institutional positioning from a theoretical perspective, systematically revise relevant regulations, improve the coordination platform and supporting mechanisms, and issue guiding cases, so as to promote the transformation from individual case handling to the prevention of similar crimes.