Draft amendments to the Public Security Administration Punishment Law are soliciting comments! It seems that many netizens, including some people in the field labeled "judicial", have criticized the speeches, items, clothing, symbols, etc. that hurt the feelings of the Chinese nation and damage the spirit of the Chinese nation.
It seems to be a big pocket, and they are worried that they can put everything in it, which will make the rights of law enforcers unrestrained, and will aggravate the contradictions between the police and the public. So much so that some people roared angrily: wearing suits and using Western medicine, these are not considered to hurt the feelings of the Chinese nation...
This is someone leading the rhythm
To Nan Sheng's surprise, many people in the judicial circles are actually leading the rhythm, they are deliberately promoting and exaggerating the "qualitative" at the level of laws and regulations, and deliberately avoiding "quantitative". To some extent, this is hindering the mainland's pace of deepening judicial reform.
Mainland law usually adopts a "qualitative + quantitative" criminalization model. The so-called characterization can be popularly understood as: what kind of crime is this - for example, the crime of "picking quarrels and provoking trouble".
According to the logic of those who question the clause "hurting the feelings of the Chinese nation and damaging the spirit of the Chinese nation", this crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble is also weighted by law enforcers and is easy to abuse. Do you also have to joke about the fear that coughing loudly on the street will be a crime?
According to their logic, they should have ridiculed, but they did not. It's all qualitative, so why don't they ridicule the crime of "picking quarrels and provoking trouble"?
This is because there is also "quantitative", that is, to explain in detail which behaviors are "picking quarrels and provoking trouble", such as: writing threatening letters or threatening the personal safety of others in other ways; Fabricating facts to falsely accuse and frame others, or attempting to subject others to criminal prosecution or public security administrative punishment.
There have also been repeated cases of forcible or arbitrary destruction or appropriation of public or private property, causing a bad social impact; Making trouble at stations, docks, airports, hospitals, shopping malls, parks, theaters, exhibitions, sports fields or other public places...
We need to remember that the clause that matches a "qualitative" offence is usually accompanied by a detailed explanation and explanation of the "quantitative" offense.
Characterization is to let ordinary people know what things cannot be done, and what crimes will be committed if they violate them; Quantification is to let law enforcers and the people know the seriousness of the mistake and will be punished to a corresponding degree.
Let's take a few more qualitative and quantitative examples
We often see such legal words: there are other serious circumstances, large amounts, egregious, serious consequences, minor...
What kind of circumstances are egregious, what kind of injury is considered minor, and what degree of damage is caused to others to be considered large? These will have corresponding judicial interpretations, not without rules.
Similarly, if the draft on hurting the "feelings of the Chinese nation" is passed, it will inevitably give a quantitative explanation to this qualified crime. Nansheng guessed that he might write: In the mainland's commemoration of the victory of the War of Resistance Against Japan, deliberately wearing Japanese militaristic clothing to swagger is a mistake.
There are precedents in foreign countries, don't people in the judicial circles know about it?
Germany, for example, prohibits people from wearing the insignia of the Nazi Party and the Third Reich, the "Skull Banner" emblem of the Nazi Party, armbands with Nazi crosses, SS daggers, skinhead insignia with SS runes, and Nazi Party blood badges.
When the Germans made their own laws, they believed that people wore and wore Nazi symbols in public, hurting national feelings. Then why can't we Chinese enact laws and regulations that hurt the feelings of the Chinese nation and harm the spirit of the Chinese nation?
In judicial practice, understanding and applying the quantitative provisions of crime in criminal law and judicial interpretations is a basic knowledge necessary for members of the judicial profession; As far as ordinary people are concerned, we deeply hate acts and speeches that hurt the feelings of the Chinese nation, and hope that we will have this crime.
Truly conscientious judicial professionals should meet the needs of the people, put forward your "quantitative" suggestions on the basis of recognizing "qualitative", and help the country improve the provisions, so that there are laws to follow, and there are laws to follow - reflecting your professionalism, not making bad words. This article is written by Nansheng, please do not reprint or plagiarize without authorization! #时事热点头条说#