On June 5438+1October 10, 2022, the case of Jiang Qiulian v. Liu Nuanxi's dispute over the right to life was pronounced, and the "Jiangge case" once again entered our field of vision. Looking back at the tragedy that happened in Japan on March 3, 20 1 16/kloc-0, the Tokyo District Court of Japan finally made a judgment on February 20, 20 17, and the defendant Chen Shifeng was convicted of threatening to kill and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment. With the verdict of Jiang Qiulian v. Liu Nuanxi's dispute over the right to life, does it mean that the "Jiangge" case has come to an end? As Jiangge's mother, Jiang Qiulian, said, she is still waiting, waiting for the murderer Chen Shifeng to get out of prison and go home, and she will continue her own litigation path.
"
trial site
As early as 20 17, there were many discussions about whether Chen Shifeng should be governed by the laws of China or Japan, including territorial jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and extradition. So over time, if Chen Shifeng is released from prison and sent back to China. Will it be investigated by our criminal law? Where is the jurisdiction of the court? Limitation of action? And the application of punishment.
First of all, according to Article 7 of China's Criminal Law: "This Law shall apply to China citizens who commit crimes stipulated in this Law outside the territory of China people. However, if the maximum penalty stipulated in this law is fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, it may not be investigated. " Combined with Chen Shifeng's judgment in Japan, according to China law, Chen Shifeng may be sentenced to death, life imprisonment or 10 years imprisonment for intentional homicide. Therefore, if Chen Shifeng returns to China, he will still be investigated for criminal responsibility.
As for jurisdiction, there are corresponding regulations. Article 8 of the Supreme People's Court's explanation on the application ofNo. [20 12]2 1: "If a citizen of China commits a crime outside the territory of People's Republic of China (PRC), it shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court of the place of entry or the place of residence before departure; If the victim is a citizen of China, it may also be under the jurisdiction of the people's court of the place where the victim lived before leaving the country. "
Let me introduce another question. If he returns to China, is it still within the limitation of prosecution? Article 87 of the Criminal Law stipulates: "A crime that exceeds the following time limit shall not be prosecuted: (1) If the statutory maximum penalty is less than five years of fixed-term imprisonment, after five years; (2) Ten years if the statutory maximum penalty is fixed-term imprisonment of not less than five years but not more than ten years; (3) Fifteen years if the statutory maximum penalty is fixed-term imprisonment of not less than ten years; (4) Twenty years have passed if the maximum legal punishment is life imprisonment or death penalty. If it is necessary to sue after 20 years, it must be reported to the Supreme People's Procuratorate for approval. " Chen Shifeng is suspected of intentional homicide in China, and the maximum legal penalty is death, so the applicable period is 20 years. Now Chen Shifeng is sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment in Japan. If you don't reduce your sentence and return to China after 20 years, you must report to the Supreme People's Procuratorate for approval. However, if you commute your sentence or return to China on parole in advance, you can directly sue.
The last question is, Chen Shifeng has served his sentence in Japan. If he is sentenced in China, how can he be investigated for criminal responsibility? Article 10 of the Criminal Law: "Anyone who commits a crime outside the territory of People's Republic of China (PRC) and should bear criminal responsibility according to this law, although he has been tried in a foreign country, but has been punished in a foreign country, can still be investigated according to this law, and his punishment can be exempted or mitigated." According to this clause, will Chen Shifeng be exempted?
The author searched for similar cases through the referee document network. Criminal judgment, the first trial of Huang's intentional homicide case in Shanghai Yangpu District People's Court (20 16), has many similarities with this case, which will help us to look at this problem correctly.
Defendant Huang and victim Meng Moumou are both Japanese migrant workers in China, living in Room 205, Gongtianzhuang, No.9, Muhei District, Tokyo, Japan. On July/KOOC-0/9/KOOC-0/8: 48, 2004, the defendant Huang and the victim Meng Moumou clashed at the residence of Room 205 in Gongtianzhuang due to trivial matters. Defendant Huang stabbed Meng with a kitchen knife and chased him to the road in front of Gongtianzhuang Apartment 18. After catching up with Meng Moumou, he stabbed the victim Meng Moumou in the chest and back continuously, and Meng was stabbed to the ground. When the local police received the alarm and rushed to the scene, the victim Meng Moumou was lying on the road outside Miyata Village, covered in blood. After being called, he didn't respond. After being sent to the hospital for rescue, he was confirmed dead at 20 o'clock on the same day. At the same time, according to the neighbor's identification, the police arrested the defendant Huang in Room 205 of Gongtianzhuang and found a bloody kitchen knife indoors. Huang admitted to the police that he stabbed someone with a knife.
After identification, the victim Meng Moumou died of excessive blood loss due to a stab wound in the chest and heart, which was fatal.
After the incident, the defendant Huang was sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment in Japan and released on parole on February 2, 2004. 20 14 12 12 The Criminal Investigation Corps of Shanghai Public Security Bureau arrested the defendant Huang who was repatriated to China at Shanghai Hongqiao International Airport.
The People's Procuratorate of Yangpu District accused the defendant Huang of intentional homicide, and his behavior has violated the provisions of Articles 7 and 232 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC). If the facts of the crime are clear and the evidence is true and sufficient, he should be investigated for criminal responsibility for intentional homicide. Because he was punished in Japan, according to the provisions of Article 10 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), his punishment can be mitigated.
The evidence for determining the case mainly includes letters issued by the Criminal Bureau of the Japanese Ministry of Justice, the Tokyo District Prosecutor's Office, and the Criminal Bureau of the Japanese Police Department, and the Work on Huang's Intentional Homicide in Japan issued by the third detachment of the Criminal Investigation Corps of the Shanghai Public Security Bureau. The judgment of Tokyo District Court and the judgment of Tokyo High Court, the report issued today by Mr. Tian Xiang, Minister of Inspection Department of Judicial Police Officers, the note of mutual assistance issued by Mr. Chikaka Guhuang, second-level director of judicial police officers, the reply issued by the director of observation section of the Protection Bureau of the Ministry of Justice, the schematic diagram with witness testimony, and the testimony of Mr. Yoshihisa Guada. The procedure of arresting active criminals by the Minggu Police Department of the Japanese Police Department, the second lesson of organizing criminal countermeasures by the Criminal Countermeasures Department of the Police Department, the report with meeting photos produced by the Ministry of Justice and Police, and the crime scene confirmation report with on-site schematic diagram and photos produced by Nobuhiro Dayan. The Record of Site Investigation and Inspection issued by the Judicial Police Department of Minggu Police Department with a schematic diagram of the scene, the Record of Search and Seizure just issued by San Pu during the judicial inspection of Minggu Police Department, the Report of Digital Photo Shooting and the Photo of Crime Tools issued by the Inspection Department of Judicial Police Department, the report of measurement results produced by the Inspection Minister of Minggu Police Department, and the crime scene reproduction record produced by Tian Jingyan and Inspection Minister Tadashi Sakai of Minggu Police Department with photos. Diagnostic results report provided by Nohiko Hisa Murakami, inspector general of the judicial police department of Minggu Police Department, witness inspection report provided by Honda Haozhi, inspector general of the judicial police department of Minggu Police Department, corpse inspection and appraisal report issued by Tokyo District Prosecutor and professor of forensic medicine of Tokyo University Graduate School of Medicine, and autopsy witness report provided by Neiyi Tian Jian of the judicial police department of Minggu Police Department. The second lesson, organized by the Crime Countermeasures Department of the Metropolitan Police Department, is the report made by Akiko Yoshida, Minister of Judicial Police Inspection, and the defense made by Ken Yoshida. Testimonies of witnesses Wang Guofen, Kuang Ye, Juetian Fangfu and Tian Xiuxin, passport copy report issued by Chai Wuzhi, inspector general of judicial police of Minggu police station, relevant entry and exit and foreigner login records, household registration collection report issued by Buhe, judicial police department of Minggu police station, registration form of cases accepted by Shanghai Public Security Bureau, source of Huang's intentional homicide,
The Yangpu District People's Court of Shanghai finally concluded that the defendant Huang deliberately deprived others of their lives with a knife, which was in line with the provisions of China's criminal law on intentional homicide. Huang's behavior has constituted the crime of intentional homicide, and the charges charged by the public prosecution agency are established and should be supported. Defendant Huang is a citizen of China. He committed a crime stipulated in the criminal law of China outside the territory of China, which should be applied to him. Although he has been tried abroad, he can still be investigated for criminal responsibility according to China's criminal law. In view of the fact that the defendant Huang has been punished abroad, the punishment can be mitigated according to law. The facts, nature, plot, degree of harm and civil compensation of the defendant Huang's crime are all considered when sentencing. In order to strictly enforce national laws and protect citizens' personal rights from infringement, according to the provisions of Article 232, Article 7, Paragraph 1 and Article 10 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the verdict is as follows: Defendant Huang committed the crime of intentional homicide and was sentenced to eight years' imprisonment.
Huang refused to accept the above judgment and appealed to the Shanghai No.2 Intermediate People's Court. The final ruling upheld the original judgment.
Combined with the above judgment, if Chen Shifeng is repatriated to China, he will be punished by China's criminal law within the limitation of prosecution or 20 years after being approved by the Supreme People's Procuratorate.
But looking back on the Jiangge case, public opinion never stopped. Maybe when Chen Shifeng returns to China, the Jiangge case will come back to our field of vision and make us rethink.
May the dead rest in peace and may justice never be absent.