Readers, what do you think about the optimization of fines and penalties? Everyone is welcome to leave a message or contribute to the discussion below. For the original manuscripts sent on this WeChat public platform, rewards will be given as appropriate based on the amount of reading, and the Hunan Provincial Criminal Rule of Law Research Association will also award the original articles every year and give different levels of rewards. What are you waiting for, come and submit!
Submission email: [email protected]
Abstract:In the context of the management of minor crimes in mainland China, fines and penalties are an important penal measure for the management of minor crimes, and lenient punishment has become the mainstream in mainland China. However, the status of fines and punishments on the mainland is not high, so its penal function has also been weakened. The scope and method of application of fines and punishments cannot respond to the needs of misdemeanor management in a timely manner, and problems such as the difficulty of enforcing fines and punishments also need to be solved urgently. In order to improve the application of fines and penalties in the mainland, it is possible to adjust the scope and method of application of fines and penalties to enhance the status of fines and punishments. At the same time, it is also possible to introduce a system of fines and punishments to bring about the transformation of fines and punishments. Under the background of the change in the structure of the criminal law from "strict but not severe" to "severe but not severe" under the control of misdemeanors in the mainland, fines can play a greater role as a light punishment.
Keywords: fines and penalties; Mild; How it works
01
Formulation of the question
Against the backdrop of the continuous criminalization of minor crimes on the mainland, the leniency of punishment also reflects the criminal policy of blending leniency and severity, and has become the mainstream of the mainland. One of the manifestations of the leniency of punishment in terms of the types of punishment is the decrease in the types of personal punishment and the increase in the number of property punishments. The criminal law of the mainland provides for the penalty of fine, which is a penal method in which the court sentences the offender to pay a certain amount of money to the state. However, the proportion and importance of fines and penalties in the mainland need to be further improved in terms of the allocation of penalties in legislation and the application of judicial penalties. Fines are typical supplementary penalties in mainland China, and their scope of application is generally limited to property crimes, and the application method is relatively simple, which is not conducive to the value of the fine and punishment system. As a result, the enforcement rate of fines and sentences is low, and it is not conducive to the realization of the concept of lenient punishment. There are different views on whether the fine can become the principal punishment: the scholars who hold the favorable opinion have analyzed the reasons why the fine penalty was not the main punishment in the past, but they believe that the fine sentence has now met the conditions as the principal punishment, and the fine sentence should be increased to the main punishment. Scholars with opposing views advocate that it is not appropriate to set the fine penalty as the main penalty, and he believes that the status of the fine penalty does not affect the degree of importance attached to it in legislation and application, and that after the fine penalty is elevated to the main penalty, it is a debatable issue that the principal penalty and the principal penalty cannot be applied at the same time, and as an additional penalty, the fine penalty is an excellent way to deal with the crime. The development of criminal policy in mainland China also needs to respond to the development of criminal legislation, and further research is still needed on whether the fine can be increased to the main punishment. At the same time, the scope of application of fines and penalties also needs to be appropriately adjusted. With regard to the enforcement of fines and penalties, some scholars have pointed out that the application of the fines and penalties system will have a good effect on offenders who are able to pay fines but do not pay fines, and for offenders who are unable to pay fines due to economic reasons. Germany implements a system of fines and penalties, and whether the system of fines and penalties can adapt to the judicial practice of the mainland also needs further research.
02
The current situation of the application of fines and penalties in mainland China
(1) The application rate of individual fines is low
In terms of legislation, the sub-provisions of the mainland criminal law stipulate four configuration modes for fines and penalties: first, fines are selected; the second is a single fine; the third is to impose a fine; Fourth, a concurrent or single fine. The concurrent fines provided for in the mainland are mandatory and concurrent fines, and the court must impose a fine in accordance with the law at the same time as the principal sentence at trial. The Criminal Law stipulates that "fines may be imposed concurrently" means that the court should decide whether to apply the fine according to the specific circumstances of the case and the property status of the offender. Among them, a total of 5 crimes were selected for fines; Only a single fine can be imposed on the unit, and there is no provision for the crime of a single fine for natural persons; A total of 65 crimes were fined concurrently or alone, and the rest were fined. In the current criminal law on the mainland, the allocation model of fines and punishments is based on the mandatory and combined penalty system. Although about a quarter of the crimes in the legislation are allocated in the mode of concurrent or single fines, in the judicial application, the proportion of natural persons with separate fines is very low.
(2) The application of fines and punishments is highly concentrated
In mainland criminal law, the provisions on fines and penalties are mainly concentrated in the crimes of undermining the order of the socialist market economy and obstructing the order of social management, and fines are treated as the main punitive means. In mainland China, fines and penalties are mainly imposed on crimes of embezzlement. There were a total of 54 negligent crimes in mainland China, of which 6 were for natural persons and 8 were for units, accounting for 11.1% and 14.8% respectively. The proportion of fines allocated for negligence crimes is not high, and the number of fines allocated for negligence crimes only accounts for 5.93% of the total number of crimes allocated with fines. Therefore, it can be seen that the fines and penalties in the mainland are mainly applicable to intentional crimes, and the proportion of fines and penalties for negligence crimes is relatively low.
(3) The discretion of the amount of fines and penalties is arbitrary
The criminal law of the mainland adopts the method of setting fines for general provisions in general provisions and sub-provisions for specific violations in sub-provisions. Article 52 of the Penal Code stipulates the principle that the amount of fines shall be determined on the basis of the circumstances of the offence, and in accordance with this principle, the system of unlimited fines, multiplier fines and finite fines shall be imposed for specific offences. Of the 236 offences for which fines were allocated, 165 were for natural persons under the unlimited fine system, 12 were for the multiplier penalty system, and 25 were for the offences under the fina limit system. It can be seen that the unlimited fine system is still dominant in China, and the latest amendments to the Criminal Law show a trend towards expanding the scope of the unlimited fine system. In order to better maintain the order of the socialist market economy, the 11th Amendment to the Criminal Law has amended the unlimited fine system for six economic crimes, so as to increase the cost of economic crimes. The unlimited fine system does not specify the upper and lower limits on the amount of fines, which is contrary to specific sentencing requirements. In the practice of judicial organs, due to the lack of a standardized sentencing system for fines and penalties, and there is no limit on the amount of fines, this will inevitably lead to an increase in the discretion of judicial personnel, resulting in the imposition of different penalties for the same crime, which is not in line with the coordination of crimes and punishments, and is not conducive to the protection of human rights.
The principle of legality of crimes shall be followed in the judicial application of fines and punishments. The relevant articles of the Criminal Law point out that criminal acts clearly stipulated in the law shall be punished in accordance with the corresponding provisions of the law; In the absence of clear provisions in the law, they cannot be convicted and sentenced. The principle of legality includes the statutory provisions of the crime and the statutory punishment, and the relevant provisions on the punishment of fines deviate from the basic principle that the criminal law must clearly stipulate the scope of sentencing. Under the discretionary system of fines and penalties based on the unlimited fine system, the discretionary power of judges is not properly limited, and judgments of different severity and severity occur in similar cases, which will greatly affect the credibility and authority of the judiciary.
(4) The issue of prepayment of fines and sentences
The issue of the payment of fines and penalties should have belonged to the scope of the enforcement of fines and penalties, but in many court judgments, the payment of fines and penalties has been written into the judgments, and has entered the field of vision of the judicial application of fines and penalties. The circumstances of the advance payment of fines and penalties shown in some judgment documents in the judgment include: First, the position of the reasons for the judgment in the judgment explains the objective facts of the advance payment of the fine, clearly indicating that it is a mitigating circumstance, and the circumstances in which the fine has been paid in parentheses are indicated in the judgment. For example, the reasons for the judgment in some judgments state: "This court considers...... All of them were first-time offenders, all of them paid fines in advance after trial, and the defendant Li is now pregnant, so in summary, this court will give the three defendants a lighter punishment and apply a suspended sentence", and indicate in the judgment office that "(the probationary period of the suspended sentence is calculated from the date on which the judgment is determined. The penalty has been paid. This is also the most common scenario. In the second case, in addition to stating the circumstances of the advance payment of the fine in the reasons for the judgment and indicating in parentheses in the judgment that the fine has been paid in the judgment, the judgment also indicates that the public prosecution will make a general sentencing recommendation, as well as a specific sentencing recommendation to reduce the sentence of the liberty sentence after paying the fine before the first-instance judgment...... The defendant is sentenced to three years imprisonment and a fine, and if the fine is paid voluntarily before the first-instance judgment, the sentencing recommendation is adjusted to two years and nine months imprisonment and a concurrent fine", and the reasons for the judgment explain that "after the defendant is brought into the case, he truthfully confesses his crime, is willing to accept punishment, returns all unlawful gains, and pays the fine in advance, and may be given a lighter punishment." In such cases, the public prosecution will clearly point out in the public prosecution opinion that the payment of the fine before the first-instance judgment can reduce the punishment of the free sentence, and under normal circumstances, the court will accept the sentencing recommendation of the public prosecution organ, and most of the public prosecution organs do not recommend the specific amount of fines, and only a small number of public prosecution organs will propose the specific amount of fines. Some scholars have pointed out that the implementation of the "advance fine" can be said to be a major reform, which can effectively reduce the impact of the shortcomings of short-term liberal sentences in the current penal system. Short-term liberal sentences, such as criminal detention and fixed-term imprisonment of less than three years, account for a considerable proportion of the mainland's penal structure, but because of their short time, the degree of their rehabilitation is limited, which is easy to cause the problem of cross-infection and be affected by bad behavior in prison. The prepayment of partial fines and sentences replaces short-term fines and sentences, and the substitution of suspended sentences for short-term liberty sentences can find a new outlet for the disadvantages of short-term liberty sentences.
However, there are various problems with the issue of the advance payment of fines and sentences. The advance payment of fines violates the principle of presumption of innocence. As an additional punishment, a fine is a way of bearing criminal responsibility, and the precondition for determining the criminal responsibility of the defendant is that he must be found guilty, otherwise there will be no question of criminal responsibility. According to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law of the mainland, no one can be found guilty without trial. At the trial stage, the guilt of the accused has not yet been determined, and the advance payment of fines at this stage is clearly based on the presumption of guilt of the accused, which is suspected of violating the principle of presumption of innocence. In addition, the act of paying a penalty in advance is not procedurally justified. In recent years, the mainland has emphasized the importance of court hearings, requiring judges to pay attention to the substantive role of court hearings and not let the process of court trials become a formality. In addition, the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that, in theory, the judge's actions before the trial only include procedural review, but not substantive review. Under mainland law, judges have the power to make the final decision on criminal acts. However, the court has introduced a way of paying the fine in advance, which means that the judge decides the crime only on the basis of the prosecutor's case. This means that the judge's decision-making power has been transferred to the prosecutor. Here, the adjudication power of the courts has been reduced to a finishing tool for the procuratorial organs' prosecution work, showing their own low judicial initiative. It is clearly not advisable to lose the procedural legitimacy of fines in order to increase the rate of enforcement of fines or to gain the benefit of other types of penalties.
03
Reflections on the Problems of Fines and Penalties in the Mainland
(1) The scope and method of application of fines and punishments in mainland China do not reflect the value of light sentences
In the mainland, the criminal law attaches great importance to the punitive effect of fines. In mainland criminal law, the concurrent system of fines is usually stipulated as mandatory. This system of fines and penalties has the effect of enforcement, which can greatly increase the frequency of its use, and at the same time is conducive to improving the consistency of maintaining the severity of crimes with similar circumstances, and has unique advantages. However, over-reliance on mandatory mergers can also lead to people getting into trouble. The actual judicial effect of fines and penalties may lead to the result of mispunishing the crime. According to Article 5 of the Criminal Law, the severity of the punishment must conform to the principle of commensurate with the criminal responsibility for the crime committed by the criminal. On the other hand, in the judicial sense, "punishment shall be deserved". Under the guidance of "proportionality of punishment for crimes" and "punishment for crimes", the balance between crime and punishment can be determined, and the relationship between them is close and close, and only when they are combined with each other can the offender be justly punished, and the punishment of the offender can be reflected, thus achieving a balance between crime, criminal responsibility and punishment. According to this principle, the degree of punishment of the punishment, that is, the sum of the punishment intensity of the liberal punishment and the penalty of fine, is commensurate with the criminal responsibility that the offender should bear. The role of fines for crimes of greed is mainly to punish crimes of greed by depriving criminals of their property and income, and to deter potential criminals from committing crimes of greed, otherwise they will "steal chickens and rice". This kind of punishment and deterrence function may lead to the alienation of fines and punishments, and by strengthening the penalty of fines, when the perpetrator has illegal gains but cannot prove it, the amount of the fine will also be affected, and the fine will be adjusted in the fine sentence and then the fine will be imposed. On the other hand, the ultimate realization of criminal justice depends on the actual implementation of the main punishment and the penalty of fine. The liberty sentence in the main sentence can be directly enforced when the criminal is deprived of liberty, but the implementation of the fine sentence is not immutable, and the fine cannot be enforced for the criminal who does not have sufficient financial resources to bear it. For criminals who are unable to pay, it is clearly a crime of mispunishment to only carry out the main sentence.
The application of fines and penalties is concentrated and mainly applicable to crimes of embezzlement, but it ignores the function of misdemeanors. Through the effective application of fines, not only can the offenders be prevented from using it as a means of speculation, so as to prevent them from committing the same crime again, but also the purpose of punishment can be achieved through the punishment of criminal punishment, thus playing a role in crime prevention. Although the application of the penalty system based on compulsory punishment can meet the needs of crimes based on greed, it cannot meet the scope of application of fines and penalties for minor crimes. Therefore, in order to better adapt to the trend of today's world, the mainland's fines and punishments should pay more attention to the punishment of lesser crimes, rather than the punishment of major crimes. In addition, fines and penalties have irreplaceable advantages for minor criminal offenses. The scope of application of the subject selection system stipulated in the Criminal Law of the Mainland is very limited, which affects the function of a single fine and punishment. However, if in judicial practice, the offender's behavior is not harmful to society, it is feasible to impose a single fine on him. However, judicial practice in mainland China often adopts the method of short-term liberty sentence or short-term liberty sentence combined with fines to punish criminal acts, while ignoring the substitution of fines and punishments. Many of the less serious offences do not provide for fines, which tends to blur people's position on fines and penalties and obscure their position in the penal structure. As a result, the penalty of punishment for minor offences under the Criminal Code is too small, ignoring the role of minor offenders.
(2) There are drawbacks in the way fines are applied
The General Provisions of the Criminal Law stipulate the basis for determining the amount of fines and penalties, that is, the punishment is determined according to the circumstances of the crime; The specific application of the discretionary amount of fines and penalties is provided for in the sub-provisions, including unlimited fines, multiplier fines, and limited fines, and the main penalty is unlimited fines. To a large extent, the penalty of unlimited fines has led similar cases in different places or even in the same place to "similar cases are not sentenced to similar cases". The amount of the fine is to the fine as the sentence is to the liberty sentence, which does not meet the basic requirements and due meaning of the law of prohibiting absolute indefinite sentences. The unlimited fine sentence does not distinguish between sentencing levels, resulting in excessive discretion of judges. Based on past experience, the Supreme People's Court of the mainland will not allow excessive judicial discretion to lead to an imbalance in judicial application, and will often make specific judicial interpretations of the more general and vague provisions of the law. However, the Supreme Court did not make a specific explanation on the issue of the unlimited fine system, but only made a principled provision that "the people's court shall impose a fine in accordance with the law based on the circumstances of the crime, such as the amount of illegal gains, the size of the losses caused, etc., and comprehensively consider the criminal's ability to pay the fine." However, in the actual enforcement process, due to the lack of standardized procedures, and the existence of other factors, judges still need to combine objective evidence and relevant social factors in order to make more accurate assessments and decisions, so as to finally determine the amount of fines. This approach to sentencing can easily lead to an unfair trial process, which makes the risk of abuse of the unlimited fine system even more prominent.
(3) It is difficult to enforce fines and punishments
The difficulty in enforcing fines and sentences has always been a difficult problem in criminal justice practice. The difficulty in enforcing fines and sentences has always been a difficult problem in criminal justice practice. The inability to effectively enforce fines not only weakens the actual effectiveness of the sentences, but also leads to the misrepresentation of criminal acts, thereby weakening the impartiality and authority of the courts. On the one hand, there is a lack of a property investigation system for the defendant from the time the case is transferred to the court to the time when the case is decided. In the actual work of trial, there are often phenomena such as parties evading enforcement and disjointed trial and execution, resulting in the inability to effectively enforce property penalties and become a form of judgment on paper. After some parties have been sentenced to property penalties, some people will deliberately transfer their assets to other people's names, or deliberately waste their assets, resulting in a situation where property penalties cannot be enforced. On the other hand, fines and punishments are mainly based on the mandatory system, and excessive reliance on the mandatory system is combined, a large number of crimes are equipped with fines, and a large number of crimes are deprived of both liberty and property freedom, and failure to pay fines will not increase the enforcement of liberty sentences, and the negative impact is small, resulting in some defendants having a negative attitude towards the payment of fines and punishments.
04
The application of fines and penalties in mainland China has been improved
In order to correctly apply the penalty of fines, it is necessary to be guided by the general principles of the application of property penalties, and combine multiple dimensions such as the circumstances of the crime, the economic status of the criminals, and the enforcement effect of the property punishment.
(1) Adjust the methods for applying fines and punishments
First, the system of unlimited fines should be phased out. The widespread application of the unlimited fine system can easily lead to abuse in judicial practice, giving judges excessive discretion, and not in line with the principle of legality for crimes. At present, the unlimited fine system is the main way to apply fines in China, but the legislative reform should not be overly drastic and should not be completely abolished, but should gradually reduce its scope of application. In principle, a multiplier fine system is adopted for crimes of greed, economic crimes, and destructive crimes, and a quota system is applied to other crimes. However, when assessing the nature of the crime, it is necessary to consider the actual circumstances of the criminal act and combine it with the object of the crime and the infringement of legal interests. In any case, a comprehensive judgment should be made in light of the actual circumstances, and in light of the actual circumstances, for the infringement of compound legal interests, it is necessary to consider whether the economy and property are important legal interests to protect the crime, and if so, a multiplier fine is to be allocated, and if not, a limited fine is to be allocated in accordance with the crime.
Second, the scope of application of the merger system should be narrowed. The imposition of fines and penalties is subject to a wide range of mandatory restrictions, limiting the discretion of judges. There are too few offences in the system of combined fines, and the provisions on the way of application are not reasonable, so it is necessary to adopt more flexible measures to impose fines. At present, the application of fines and penalties has been greatly increased, and unlike at the beginning of the enactment of the Criminal Law, the urgency of increasing the scope of application of fines and penalties has been reduced, and the courts' awareness of the application of fines and penalties has gradually increased. First, there are obvious limitations to mandatory fines, which are too rigid, too absolute, and not flexible enough. As a result, when judges are faced with diverse situations, such as adjudicating criminal acts, it is difficult to classify them so as to achieve the goal of assigning different levels of severity to different levels of crime. Fines have a good effect on punishing crimes of greed for profit, but if they are applied indiscriminately without distinguishing the viciousness of the crimes and the degree of harm to society, they will lose their unique functions. Although the "one-size-fits-all" rule gives fines and penalties to punish corruption and bribery, it makes it impossible for the judiciary to consider how to flexibly choose the punishment in different circumstances, resulting in the final punishment result often being much higher than the victim's tolerance.
(2) Adjust the scope of application of fines and punishments
The scope of application of fines is closely related to the function of fines. The role of a fine penalty is to punish crimes, but its effectiveness depends on the scope of its application. If the offence is less serious or less dangerous, then fines can be used as an effective preventive measure. In this way, not only can it be an alternative to short-term liberty sentences, but it can also provide more punishment options for misdemeanors. Moreover, misdemeanors often meet the conditions for probation, and when criminals whose crimes are not serious, they can better play the function of criminal law education and punishment when they are sentenced to a suspended sentence and fined. Some offenders have committed minor offences that require only a few suspended sentences to serve the public interest, in which case there is no need to consider the application of a liberal sentence. In general, a suspended sentence means that after being convicted and sentenced to a certain period of liberty, the procedure prescribed by law is followed, without the immediate imposition of a custodial sentence. Through the probation system and fines, we can better prevent the occurrence of "cross-infection" cases, and at the same time, we can better promote the rehabilitation of criminals, help them reintegrate into society, and reduce the economic burden of the country. As an additional punishment, fines may be applied independently, and should not always play an auxiliary role around the main punishment. For different crimes, their self-positioning and application tension are different. Compared with intentional crimes, the subjective malice of the perpetrator of a crime of negligence is much lower, and his view of the outcome of the crime is negative. In addition, as mentioned above, in the process of enforcing a liberal sentence, there will inevitably be a problem of "cross-infection", which will have a great negative impact on those who already have negative cognitions, so that the educational function of criminal law cannot be fully brought into play. Therefore, for the negligence crime of a typical misdemeanor, the allocation of a fine sentence is a better choice, which is commensurate with the degree of harm of the crime and can avoid many drawbacks of custodial sentences.
(3) The construction of a system of fines and fines
The system of fines and penalties refers to the use of other criminal punishment methods or other non-criminal punishment measures to replace enforcement with other criminal punishment methods in order to ensure the enforcement of fines and penalties when the offender refuses to pay or is unable to pay the fines and penalties that make it impossible to enforce the fines and penalties awarded by the court. As for the optimization of fines and penalties, some scholars have proposed that a system of fines can be established in the general provisions of the Criminal Code of the Mainland, that is, the conversion relationship between fines and controlled, short-term detention and fixed-term imprisonment can be established, which can be stipulated as Article 69, Paragraph 3 of the Criminal Code, which can be specifically expressed as "fines can be converted into controlled, short-term detention, and fixed-term imprisonment on a daily basis." "Germany criminal law provides that when the offender is unable to enforce the fine, the court will convert the number of days of the fine into the number of days of the sentence of liberty, and the execution of the sentence of liberty will make up for the gap in the unenforceable penalty of the fine. Judicial organs are often powerless when fines and sentences cannot be enforced, seriously undermining the authority and credibility of the judiciary. In judicial practice, the reasons for the offender's failure to pay the fine are varied, some are unable to pay but evade the payment obligation, and some are unable to pay due to economic reasons. However, the legal consequences of non-payment of fines by offenders are not clear in the Penal Code. However, as a kind of criminal punishment, the penalty of fine should also have enforceable force, and the offender must be strictly enforced after being sentenced in accordance with the law, otherwise the judgment will lose its value and significance, and the law will lose its seriousness.
The mainland should introduce a system of fines and punishments. The application of fines and penalties and the free punishment system have a good effect on both the offenders who have the ability to pay but do not pay the fines, and the offenders who are unable to pay the fines but do not pay them. For the former, the system can play a great role in supervising the execution of a free sentence if the fine is not paid, and for the latter, the system can be converted into a free sentence when the fine cannot be executed, so as to prevent him from escaping the punishment of the penalty. However, it should be made clear that the system of fine punishment should be used as the ultimate remedy for the failure to enforce the fine sentence. Under this system, the relationship between a fine and a liberal sentence is not a simple one-of-a-kind relationship, and can only be applied if the fine imposed on the offender has not been paid after all means have been exhausted.
05
epilogue
When fines play an increasingly important role in the mainland's penal system, it shows that the mainland's criminal law structure is becoming more and more relaxed. But no system is perfect, and the same is true for fines. It is a topic worthy of in-depth study on how to improve the fine and punishment system so that its unique value can be brought into play to a greater extent. For countries with increasingly developed economies, economic crimes will increase correspondingly, and it is necessary to focus on cracking down on greedy crimes, in which the important role of fines and penalties is self-evident. In order to ensure that criminal punishment can play an effective role, it is necessary to ensure that it is properly enforced and authoritative. The mainland has always attached great importance to the punishment of liberty and life, and relatively speaking, the punishment of fines has attracted less attention, and as the punishment is becoming more and more lenient, the punishment of fines will inevitably become more and more widely applied. Reflections on the problems, causes, and normative methods in the judicial application of fines and penalties should be gradually responded to in practice, so as to prepare for the implementation of the wider application of fines and penalties in the future.
bibliography
[1] Zhang Mingkai. Criminal Law (Sixth Edition)[M].Beijing:Law Press,2021.
[2] Zhao Bingzhi, Yin Jianfeng, Yuan Bin, Huang Xiaoliang, Liu Ke, Zhang Lei, Li Shanhe, Du Miao, Zhang Weike. Outline of the revision and improvement of China's criminal law[J].Criminal Law Review,2012,(04).
[3] Zhao Bingzhi, Jin Yixiang. On the World Background and Chinese Practice of Punishment Mitigation[J].Law Application,2012,(06).
[4] Zhang Mingkai. Rethinking Several Issues of Fines and Punishments[J].China Law Science,1991,(04).
[5] Wang Yansong, Wu You. Research on the application of fines and punishments: the contradiction between the two laws of high application rate and low execution rate[J].China Journal of Criminal Law,2013,150(06).
[6] Li Jie. Contemporary Legal Science,1989,(03).
[7] Yao Wanqin. Criminal Law Governance: Focusing on the Application of Non-custodial Sentences[N].Procuratorate Daily,2021-04-01(003).
[8] Sun Wanhuai, Jiang Aoli. The Concept and Rules of the Application of Fines in the Criminal Law of China: From the Perspective of the Practical Controversy of the Crime of Using Undisclosed Information for Trading[J].Journal of Southeast University(Philosophy and Social Science),2020,22(05).
[9] Wu Changqing. Reflection on the practice of "prepayment of fines"[J].Law Science,2010,(03).
[10] Zeng Jun, Shi Liangliang. Analysis and development of legal supervision of court pre-collected fines[J].China Journal of Criminal Law,2011,(04).
[11] Han Yi. Reflections on the legislation of mandatory fines and penalties[J].Law and Business Research(Journal of Central South University of Political Science and Law),2000,(05).
[12] Shao Weiguo, Zhou Xuehua. On the advantages and disadvantages of the application of fines and penalties in mainland China and its improvement[J].Journal of Changchun Normal University,2004,(06).
[13] Liu Shiyou. From Reality to Ideal: An Exploration of the Perfect Path of Fines and Punishments[J].Application of Law,2013,(01).
[14] Ouyang Benqi, Liu Meng. The tendency of heavy criminalization and its judicial restrictions in the Amendment (11) of the Criminal Law[J].Journal of Southeast University(Philosophy and Social Science),2021,23(03).
[15] Zhang Yichi. Research on the legislative improvement of the fine and penal system in mainland China[D].Henan Normal University,2023.
Producer: Zhang Yongjiang
Author: He Siyu, a 2023 graduate student majoring in criminal law at the School of Law of Xiangtan University
Editor: He Siyu
Editor-in-charge: Xu Yuanyuan
Review: Wu Xia
Hunan Provincial Criminal Rule of Law Research Association
Sina Weibo|@湖南省刑事法治研究会
Today's headlines|Hunan Provincial Criminal Rule of Law Research Association