Source: Author:
This paper demonstrates the theoretical basis of the criminal law of the non-penalization movement, analyzes the ways and means of the non-penalization movement, and advocates that China should implement the criminal policy of "light and heavy", punish major crimes with heavy punishment, and decriminalize minor crimes in due course.
I decriminalization: its origin and conceptual basis
Hans Heinrich Giesecke, a famous German criminologist, once pointed out that through the study of criminology and all kinds of research related to it, modern criminal policy has roughly formed the following three understandings about how to deal with crimes and what methods and means should be adopted to overcome them: First, in order to avoid unnecessarily defining certain acts as crimes, and at the same time to safeguard the seriousness of punishment in the eyes of ordinary people, legislators must limit the scope of acts that must be attributed to criminal law to safeguarding public interests. Second, because most people develop normally, it is necessary to expand the test methods for people who commit minor or even moderate crimes in a free state. The study of crime secret figures not only reveals the universal existence of crime, but also finds that citizens' loyalty to the law is stronger than the temptation to lead people to felony. As long as people are free from serious crimes that threaten the peace guaranteed by law, they should not think that public safety is threatened. Therefore, for those who commit minor or even moderate crimes, the method of testing in a free state should be expanded. Third, the work of the police and the judiciary should focus on more serious crimes, while lighter crimes should be entrusted to the administrative organs and handled through simplification. [1] Professor Giesecke's exposition actually outlines a major principle of the criminal law reform movement in the contemporary world-the modesty of criminal law and two major themes-decriminalization and decriminalization.
Decriminalization and decriminalization, as the two major themes of the criminal law reform movement in the contemporary world, are the direct requirements of the principle of modesty of criminal law as the basic criminal policy of modern criminal law. The so-called modesty of criminal law means that criminal law should be the last line of defense against illegal acts in society. Illegal acts that can be adjusted by other legal means should not be adjusted by criminal law as far as possible, and criminal acts that can be adjusted by lighter criminal law should not be adjusted by heavier criminal law as far as possible.
The principle of modesty of criminal law first strictly narrows the scope of criminal law intervention, that is, the legal crime circle, and tries not to deal with illegal acts that cannot be handled. Under the existing conditions of western countries' criminal policy thought of highly moralized morality and highly moralized criminal law, and the criminalization mode of "legislation qualitative and judicial quantitative", the criminal law reform first embodies the principle of modesty of criminal law by decriminalizing traditional moral crimes and administrative crimes with little harm. In China, however, the circle of legal crimes is strictly controlled by the criminalization mode of "legislative qualitative restrictions and quantitative requirements". Although the advantages and disadvantages of the two models are different, they can be said to achieve the same goal in embodying the principle of modesty of criminal law. Secondly, the principle of modesty in criminal law also requires strictly narrowing the scope of statutory punishment and widely applying alternative measures of punishment. The so-called strict contraction of the legal penalty circle means that although the act constitutes a crime and criminal responsibility should be investigated according to law, the conditions for applying punishment to criminal acts are strictly controlled when deciding the response to criminal acts, and when other non-penalty treatment means can be adopted to prevent and control crimes without applying punishment, the application of punishment is excluded and non-penalty treatment means are used instead. This is the main content of the decriminalization movement in the contemporary criminal law reform movement.
As one of the themes of contemporary criminal law reform synchronized with decriminalization, decriminalization movement is the product of the dispute between objective punishment and retribution punishment. Retribution punishment is rooted in the deep-rooted revenge emotion of "good is rewarded with good, evil with evil". /kloc-JAMESSTEPHEN, a famous British criminal historian in the 0/9th century, once said: "Revenge is as important to criminal law as sexual desire is to marriage, and punishing criminals is a legal way to vent common impulses." [2] Post-Kant's moral retribution (Note: Kant's moral retribution holds that crime is an act that people with free will violate the absolute command of reason, and punishment is a just punishment and retribution for the criminal's moral responsibility caused by crime, which is a rational requirement. ), Hegel's legal retribution (note: Hegel's legal retribution holds that crime denies absolute law, and punishment is the negation of crime's negation of law. The essence of punishment lies in the negation and sublation of crime. Only through negation of negation can the law show its effectiveness and justice be restored. ) and Binding's normative retribution (note: Binding's normative retribution holds that crime is a violation of norms under the premise of criminal law, and punishment is a criminal act that the state denies norms based on the right of demanding criminals to obey norms. As a systematic punishment theory, retribution punishment advocates that crime is an evil, and punishment is only a response to the evil of social crime. The significance and essence of punishment lies in retribution for the evil caused by criminal acts, and the evil of criminal acts and criminal responsibility are balanced through the pain imposed by punishment in order to realize social justice. The concept of retribution punishment holds that punishment should be freed from all the purposes of crime prevention. As a just retribution for the evil of crime, punishment should take crime as the only legitimate reason, and the degree of evil of crime should be the only basis for determining the severity of punishment. In short, retribution advocates retribution with punishment and punishment as a crime. It only pursues the restoration of justice and the satisfaction of human revenge feelings, without considering the utilitarian purpose of punishment, especially the necessity of preventing recidivism. Under the guidance of retribution, crime must be punished, and punishment is crime, and the legal crime circle is exactly the same as the legal punishment circle.
On the other hand, objective penalism holds that no matter how fair the penalty is to the after-the-fact retribution of a crime, it is impossible to change the fact that the crime has occurred, nor can it make up for the evil caused by the crime or restore the original state before the crime, so the penalty retribution that focuses on the degree of crime harm is always passive, negative and futile. In fact, as long as the punishment is national, it can't be primitive instinct and impulse, and it must have some necessity and purpose. For example, Liszt pointed out: "The concept of purpose of law is internal, and the concept of purpose of this law is the ontology of law. ...... Only by thoroughly restraining the power of punishment with the concept of the purpose of punishment is the ideal of penalism. " [3] Rawls further clearly pointed out: "Whether the penalty is appropriate can only be evaluated according to the penalty as a tool to maintain social order and the possible effect of its implementation. If the result of punishment shows that it has the effect of promoting social interests, it is appropriate; Otherwise, it is not appropriate. " [4] The objective punishment theory holds that, on the one hand, punishment must be a means to achieve the reasonable purpose of social defense; On the other hand, punishment must serve the purpose of preventing people with social harm from committing social harm, and individual punishment should be determined according to the individual situation of each criminal. According to the empirical scientific research on the causes of crime and the situation of criminals, the theory of objective punishment advocates that different punishments should be applied to different types of criminals. For example, Enrico Ferri advocates the application of isolation punishment to natural criminals and habitual criminals who cannot be reformed, treatment and correction punishment to habitual criminals and accidental criminals who may be reformed, compensation for damages to passionate criminals, and preventive measures to those who are still dangerous after execution and those who are innocent but have a criminal tendency in advance. Liszt advocates punishment as the main means for opportunistic criminals, correction, treatment and probation for those who may improve, and long-term or lifelong isolation for those who cannot improve. In addition, Liszt also advocated limiting short-term free punishment, expanding the scope of probation and parole, abolishing or limiting the death penalty, improving execution facilities, and implementing the system of security measures and life imprisonment. It is the objective punishment theory represented by Philip and Liszt that sees the functional limitations of passive, ex post and negative punishment of traditional punishment for crimes. While actively advocating the concept of objective punishment, we actively explore "penalty substitution measures" to make up for the deficiency of penalty function, and put forward the theory of non-penalty treatment and security measures to limit the scope of penalty application. Under the advocacy of objective punishment theory, and on the basis of reflecting on the defects of the traditional penalty system centered on deprivation of liberty, criminal laws in various countries have stipulated non-penalty measures for crimes to varying degrees, thus greatly limiting the scope of legal penalty circles and promoting the non-penalty movement in the worldwide criminal law reform movement.
Second, decriminalization: ways and means
Looking at the non-penalization movement in the criminal law reform in the world today, the ways and means to substantially limit the penalty cycle through non-penalization mainly include:
(1) By stipulating the system and circumstances of exemption from punishment, the scope of application of punishment is substantially limited.
The criminal law of modern countries has broken away from the barrier of retribution punishment, and generally stipulates the exemption system as an exception to the principle that guilt must be punished, and stipulates the exemption of many criminal acts. As long as the perpetrator has a statutory exemption from punishment, although his behavior still constitutes a crime, the court can only find him guilty and declare him exempt from punishment. For example, Article 132-58 of the French Criminal Code stipulates: "In a misdemeanor case, or in a case other than those stipulated in Articles 132-63 and 132-65, in case of violation of the police, the court declares the defendant guilty and confiscates harmful substances or dangerous substances when necessary. Article 132-59 stipulates: "Those who show that criminals have reintegrated into society, the losses caused have been compensated, and the harm caused by crimes has stopped may be exempted from punishment. The court that announces the exemption from punishment may decide not to record its decision in the criminal record. " [5] Article 60 of the German Criminal Code stipulates: "For criminals who have suffered from crimes, the court should exempt them from punishment, and it is obviously inappropriate to add punishment. However, this provision does not apply to cases where a criminal should be sentenced to more than one year's imprisonment for his crime. " In addition, Article 23 of the Law also stipulates: "If the perpetrator fails to complete the attempted crime due to a major misunderstanding, the court may, at its discretion, exempt or mitigate the punishment according to the nature of the criminal object or the means used. Article 24 stipulates: "(1) If the perpetrator voluntarily stops the crime from continuing or prevents the crime from being completed, it shall not be punished as an attempted crime. As long as the perpetrator actively and seriously tries to prevent the completion of the crime, even if the crime is not completed because of the suspension of the behavior, it should be exempted from punishment. (2) When several people commit a crime together, if they prevent the crime from being completed for their own reasons, they shall not be treated as attempted crime. If the crime is not completed due to the suspension of the act or the crime has nothing to do with the previous participation of the discontinuer, as long as the discontinuer makes serious efforts to prevent the completion of the crime out of his own will, he should also be exempted from punishment. " 〔6〕
(two) through non-criminal sanctions to substantially limit the scope of application of punishment.
The so-called non-criminal sanctions mean that criminals who are found guilty according to law are not punished by punishment, but are punished by non-criminal sanctions other than punishment. Non-criminal sanctions are generally applicable to criminals who are exempted from punishment, criminals with minor crimes or minors with minor crimes. They do not have the nature of punishment, but they can make up for the limitation of punishment function.
With the development of decriminalization movement, many non-criminal sanctions are stipulated by criminal laws of various countries as sanctions rather than punishments. For example, the British Criminal Justice Act 1972 provides for community service orders and day training centers as alternatives to imprisonment. Germany reformed the criminal code in 1975, which ruled out the criminal nature of the crime of assaulting a police officer, and regarded the crime of assaulting a police officer as a general illegal act, and only imposed an administrative fine, not a criminal fine. Belgium implements a system of deferred prosecution. If the public prosecutor thinks that the prosecution can be suspended according to the criminal's personality, age, plot, nature, plot and severity and the situation after the crime, he may decide not to prosecute for the time being and conduct inspection and supervision. After a certain period of investigation and supervision, if the actor is considered to have performed well, he can decide not to prosecute. This practice was introduced to the United States in the 1960s, and then it was transformed into a pre-trial investigation and supervision system. The defendant subject to pre-trial inspection and supervision must be a person found guilty by the prosecutor. If his behavior does not constitute a crime, he cannot be examined and supervised before the court. Therefore, pre-trial inspection and supervision is a non-penalty way to deal with people who have actually committed crimes. In line with the pre-trial investigation and supervision, there is also a more widely applicable non-criminal reaction mode in the United States, that is, probation supervision. Probation supervision means that the judge announces that the defendant has committed a criminal act and does not sentence him, but stipulates a supervision and test period, during which the convicted person should abide by special obligations under the supervision of the probation officer. If the convicted person is considered to have performed well in supervision, the penalty will not apply to him after the expiration of the time limit. At present, all jurisdictions in the United States have stipulated this probation supervision system. [7] In addition to the United States, Britain, Commonwealth countries and even France, Belgium, Sweden and other civil law countries have adopted this probation supervision system. However, although probation supervision is also a treatment method suitable for criminals, it is essentially a non-penalty treatment method, which is essentially different from the probation system implemented in most countries of civil law system and a few States in the United States. The probation system generally implemented in civil law countries means that the court declares the defendant guilty and sentences him to deprive him of his freedom for a certain period of time. At the same time, according to certain conditions, the execution of punishment is suspended, and supervision and inspection for a certain period of time and special obligations that should be observed are stipulated. If the criminal is considered to have performed well in supervision, the original sentence will not be executed. In the United States, this probation system is called suspended imprisonment, and only a few States implement this suspended imprisonment system. In fact, probation is only a way of execution of imprisonment, although the actual consequence of probation may be that the original imprisonment will not be executed. In the United States, in addition to the above-mentioned non-penalty treatment methods, people also seek public and private help and use mediation procedures to avoid conflicts in criminal proceedings through the intervention of some unofficial institutions and groups. This is the so-called "shunt". [8] The earliest transposition attempt appeared in the late 1960s and early 1970s of this century. 1969 the Philadelphia municipal court set up an arbitration tribunal. 1970 Ohio formulated a plan for the night prosecutor program of the attorney general of Columbus. Both plans deal with a large number of minor criminal cases outside the court, giving both parties to the conflict an opportunity to discuss their conflicts and try to resolve their disputes. The mediator of Columbus Project is a law student who has received special training in mediation skills. Shortly after its launch, the plan was very popular and widely spread. 1974 The Committee of Officials of the Federal Ministry of Justice listed the plan as a demonstration project. By the 1980s, more than 30 states and about 140 cities had implemented similar transfer plans, but with different names, such as "Resident Dispute Mediation Center", "Neighborhood Trial Center", "Community Mediation Center", "Community Committee Plan" and "City Court Project". [9] In Canada, this trend is called "de-judicialization".
In the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, there are gay courts or corporate courts specializing in minor crimes. [10] (3) Make up for the deficiency of penalty function and limit the application scope of penalty through security measures.
Sicherndemassnahmen refers to the judicial measures taken by the state against specific actors by means of correction, probation, medical parole and prohibition, in addition to exercising the right of punishment, based on the need of maintaining social order and meeting the needs of public safety. Security measures are generally applicable to those who are not responsible, those who are limited in responsibility and criminals with special risks, such as recidivists, recidivists and recidivists. In some countries, security measures are also applicable to those who have never committed a crime but the circumstances are serious.
Security punishment is the result of the transformation of modern punishment theory from retribution punishment to education punishment, the theoretical crystallization of criminal law concept innovation and the product of the debate between criminal positivism school and criminal classicism school. As a criminal policy concept, security measures were originally put forward by German criminal law scholar Klein. He believes that maintaining public peace and happiness is the only legal basis for all criminal legislation. Therefore, in addition to punishment, it is necessary to take safety measures according to the criminal risk of the perpetrator. Because "punishment has the exact content according to the actual degree of crime, while public security punishment has the irregular content based on the criminal risk of the perpetrator." 〔 1 1〕
After nearly a hundred years' efforts, safety measures have been confirmed in the legislation of most countries, and their contents are increasingly enriched and improved. Throughout the legislative cases of various countries, the broad sense of public security punishment can be divided into two categories: punishment for people and punishment for things. The punishment of things generally includes dissolution of legal person, blockade of business premises and confiscation of prohibited items; Security measures against people can be divided into deprivation of freedom and restriction of freedom. "The so-called public security punishment of deprivation of liberty refers to the deprivation of the personal freedom of the person being punished, the detention in the public security punishment enforcement agency or the social treatment agency, and the public security punishment such as guardianship, treatment, prohibition, probation education, compulsory labor and public security imprisonment." [12] There are seven kinds of security measures for deprivation of liberty: (1) medical and nursing measures, that is, treatment and protection measures for mentally incapacitated people without penalty adaptability and mentally weak people with limited liability. German, Italian, Japanese and Taiwan Province provinces all have this regulation. (2) Compulsory detoxification, that is, compulsory smoking or using addictive substances such as narcotic drugs and stimulants and alcoholics. German, Italian, Swiss, Japanese and Taiwan Province criminal laws all have this provision. (3) Compulsory treatment, that is, compulsory medical treatment for specific criminals suffering from infectious diseases. The criminal law of Taiwan Province Province in China has this provision. (4) Corrective education, that is, minors who violate the criminal law, or minors who are in danger of violating the criminal law, or minors who are in danger of affecting social order, are based on the needs of nip in the bud and social security. Most countries have this provision in their criminal laws. (5) Compulsory labor punishment is a kind of labor training punishment for all criminals who are lazy, wandering and disgusted with legitimate labor. German, Swiss, Austrian and China Taiwan Province criminal laws all have provisions on this. (6) Public security imprisonment refers to the punishment measures for recidivists and recidivists in the national criminal law that adopts the dual-track system of punishment and public security punishment. Its content is to give irregular preventive imprisonment to recidivists and recidivists who have been punished for a long time and have not been corrected, which is the most severe public security punishment measure. Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom provide for such punishment. (7) Accommodation in social correction institutions refers to the establishment of special social correction institutions to correct and re-socialize criminals with special social treatment, consultation and psychotherapy methods. The criminal laws of Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany all have this provision. [13] There are five kinds of security measures to restrict freedom: (1) deprivation of driver's license, that is, deprivation of driver's license for criminals who are obviously unfit to drive motor vehicles to participate in road traffic. German criminal law has this provision. (2) Prohibition of practicing, that is, a person who intentionally commits a crime or undermines his professional or business obligations by abusing his professional knowledge or his unique professional or business relationship is prohibited from engaging in the profession or business for a certain period of time or permanently. (3) The punishment of suspended sentence is a kind of persuasion, evaluation and management for recidivists who are in danger of recidivism, so as to prevent them from recidivism during the dangerous period after release. (4) Protection and restraint, that is, the punishment of forcing criminals with less social danger to leave the country or repatriate after entrusting them to the local police organs, autonomous organizations, charitable organizations, relatives or other appropriate personnel for protection or pardon. 〔 14〕
Third, decriminalization: evaluation and choice
Under the influence of modern criminal law thought and criminal policy, decriminalization movement has become the theme of criminal law reform movement sweeping most countries in the world, which has had a great and far-reaching impact on traditional criminal law in various countries. Non-penalization poses a fundamental challenge to the traditional retribution punishment, changes people's long-held concept of retribution, promotes the change of society's attitude towards crime and criminals, and also saves the input of national penalty resources, making modern society's response to crime more diversified, humanized, civilized and economical. The practical effect of widely applying non-penalty sanctions to minor crimes and moderately serious crimes in various countries shows that the society has adopted a more tolerant attitude towards these crimes that do not seriously threaten social order and public welfare, and has not led to a significant increase in the crime rate. On the contrary, due to the independent or auxiliary application of non-penalty sanctions, the disadvantages of traditional penalties, especially short-term deprivation of liberty, have been largely avoided, thus effectively controlling the situation that the recidivism rate and recidivism rate have obviously increased for a period of time and maintaining the overall relative stability of the crime situation. In recent years, the crime rate in some countries, such as the United States, has even dropped continuously and obviously.
Non-penalization movement represents the latest trend of tolerating minor crimes in modern society, but it cannot be considered that non-penalization has become the dominant aspect of modern western criminal policy. In fact, the criminal policy of modern western countries, based on the concept of penalty purpose and cost-effectiveness, not only emphasizes the non-penalization of minor crimes and even general crimes, but also attaches great importance to concentrating limited penalty resources and severely punishing serious crimes. The former represents the "light" side of criminal policy in modern western countries, while the latter represents the "heavy" side of criminal policy in modern western countries. The criminal policy of "light and heavy" is essentially different from that of the United States. It is generally believed that the criminal policies of some European countries are characterized by "light and heavy, with light as the mainstay". The characteristics of American criminal policy are "light and heavy, heavy and light". 〔 15〕
China is a socialist country, and combining leniency with severity is our basic criminal policy. In connection with the worldwide non-penalization movement, China's criminal law also stipulates the system and situation of exempting criminals from punishment. According to the provisions of China's criminal law, statutory exemption from punishment includes cases that should be exempted from punishment and cases that can be exempted from punishment. Among them, the circumstances that should be exempted from punishment are: the crime was suspended and no damage was caused; Excessive defense; Excessive hedging; Coerced accomplice; Surrender oneself after committing a crime, with significant meritorious service. The circumstances that can be exempted from punishment are: committing a crime outside China and being punished in a foreign country; Deaf or blind people commit crimes; Preparatory crime; The cessation of crime causes damage; Accessories; Surrender oneself after committing a crime, and the crime is relatively minor; Having made significant meritorious service; The amount of personal corruption is more than 5000 yuan and less than 10000 yuan, and he regrets the crime and actively returns the stolen money and goods; The briber voluntarily confessed the bribery before being prosecuted; Illegal cultivation of opium poppy or other narcotic plants, automatic eradication before harvest, and so on. On the other hand, China's criminal law also stipulates that non-penalty treatment can be used instead of punishment for people with minor crimes. Article 37 stipulates: "If the circumstances of the crime are minor and there is no need to be sentenced to criminal punishment, criminal punishment may be exempted, but according to the different circumstances of the case, it may be admonished or ordered to make a statement of repentance, apologize and compensate for the losses, or the competent department may give administrative sanctions or administrative penalties." In addition, in practice, there are many kinds of administrative compulsory measures applicable to people with minor criminal circumstances, such as reeducation through labor, detention and education, and forced withdrawal. As the application of non-penalty compulsory measures, these measures essentially limit the scope of application of punishment and are an important way to deal with minor crimes without punishment in China.
On the whole, however, influenced by the legal and cultural tradition of generalization, omnipotence and severe punishment of criminal law, China's criminal legislation and criminal justice have not paid enough attention to non-penalty movements, and the non-penalty treatment measures in legislation have not formed a systematic and complete criminal law system. In judicial practice, it is even less to deal with minor crimes by non-penalty treatment instead of punishment. In recent ten years, the severe crime situation has forced legislators to constantly formulate new criminal laws to strengthen criminal punishment. In judicial practice, according to these criminal laws, severe punishment and death penalty are widely used, but the high crime rate and major case rate have not been effectively curbed by severe punishment. In practice, a situation of structural confrontation between crime and punishment is formed, that is, punishment does not suppress crime, the amount of crime and punishment spirals viciously, the penalty investment approaches the limit, but the penalty benefit drops sharply. In a sense, this structural confrontation between crime and punishment actually means that the operation of China's criminal law is facing a fundamental crisis.
We believe that there may be many ways and means to solve this basic crisis of criminal law. However, it is undoubtedly an important choice to change criminal law thinking, innovate criminal policy and adjust the structure of society to deal with crime. The important aspect of changing criminal law thinking is to completely abandon the concept of retribution punishment, publicize the concept of punishment modesty and criminal law economy, admit the last resort of punishment, and choose the social response of crime according to the cost-benefit analysis. Reforming the criminal policy is to replace the one-sided "strike hard quickly" policy that has been implemented in China for more than ten years with a "light and heavy" criminal policy that conforms to the principles of modesty and economy of criminal law, while not relaxing the severe crackdown on serious crimes. Of course, according to the current social development in China, especially the severe crime situation, the criminal policy we choose should be similar to that of the United States. According to this criminal policy, our criminal legislation and criminal justice should treat crimes of different nature and harm differently when determining their responses to crimes. For crimes with minor nature, circumstances and consequences, we should pay more attention to them, try our best to make non-penalty adjustments, and achieve the greatest effect of controlling and preventing crimes with the least penalty resources, so as to maximize the operational benefits of our criminal law.
refer to
Hans Heinrich Giesecke. A summary of the world criminal law reform movement [J]. Legal translation, 1988.3.
[2] Sanford. Encyclopedia of Kadish,
Free press, page 5 18.
[3] Liszt. The concept of the purpose of criminal law is quoted from Gan Yuyu. Monographs on Criminal Law [M]. Beijing: Peking University Publishing House, 1989.263.
[4][ America] Richard-Hawkins. American prison system-punishment and justice [M]. Beijing: People's Public Security University of China Press, 199 1.98.
[5] Jane Luo translation, Gao Mingxuan professional revision. French Criminal Code (1 March 19941came into force) [a]. Beijing: People's Public Security University of China Press, 1995.40-4 1.
Zhu huaizhi Selected Laws on Punishing Economic Crimes and Duty Crimes in America and Germany [M]. Beijing: Peking University Publishing House, 1994.438+099.
Zhu huaizhi American criminal law [M]. Beijing: Peking University Publishing House, 1996.
[8][ France] Mark Ansel. Looking at the new development of criminal policy in western countries from the perspective of social protection movement [J]. Chinese and foreign law, 1989.2.
[9] Sanford. Kadish, Encyclopedia of Criminal Justice, p. 624.
[10][ Poland] Shivak. Non-penalty measures in Polish criminal law [J]. Legal translation, 1988.5.
[1 1][ Japan] Kimura Kamei II. Dictionary of criminal law [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 1995438+0.465.
Lin. Punishment [M] The Commercial Press, 1983.350.
[13] is the same as [4], 35 1-367.
[14] Same as [4], 367-379.
Yang. On criminal policy [M]. Beijing: Peking University Publishing House 1995.420.