These Regulations shall apply to the judicial organs of cities, counties and districts. Article 3 When handling cases, the staff of judicial organs shall adhere to the principle of taking facts as the basis and taking the law as the criterion, so that the facts are clear, the evidence is conclusive, the nature is accurate, the handling is appropriate and the procedure is legal. Article 4 Any functionary of a judicial organ who intentionally or negligently causes a wrong case shall be investigated for responsibility in accordance with these Regulations. Article 5 The principle of seeking truth from facts, investigating mistakes, investigating responsibilities and combining punishment with education shall be adhered to in investigating the responsibility of misjudged cases. Carry out case-by-case investigation, and investigate and deal with them at any time when they are found. Chapter II Definition of Misjudged Cases Article 6 The term "misjudged cases" as mentioned in these Regulations refers to cases in which the judicial organs and their staff have misjudged cases due to inaccurate facts, inaccurate characterization, incorrect application of laws and regulations or violation of legal procedures. Article 7 Among criminal and administrative cases handled by public security organs, the following cases that meet the provisions of Article 6 are misjudged cases:
(a) by the public security punishment and reeducation through labor, revoked after reconsideration or administrative proceedings;
(two) the wrong implementation of criminal detention;
(three) the criminal suspect who should be arrested according to law has not been arrested, and the procuratorial organ decides to make additional arrests and impose criminal penalties;
(four) the criminal suspect who should be transferred for prosecution according to law does not transfer for prosecution, and the procuratorial organ decides to investigate his criminal responsibility;
(five) the criminal suspect illegally obtained a bail pending trial, resulting in serious consequences;
(six) other circumstances that should be corrected according to law. Article 8 Among the criminal cases handled by procuratorial organs, the following cases that meet the provisions of Article 6 are misjudged cases:
(a) the wrong decision of criminal detention;
(2) to approve or decide to arrest a person who has no evidence to prove the facts of the crime; Failing to approve or decide not to arrest a criminal suspect who should be arrested according to law, and failing to make corrections after examination;
(3) In a case of public prosecution, the defendant was acquitted by the judicial organ, and the procuratorial organ did not protest or upheld the original judgment after protesting;
(4) Deciding not to prosecute a criminal suspect who should be prosecuted according to law;
(5) omission of the defendant or important criminal facts in the case of public prosecution;
(six) the criminal suspect illegally obtained bail pending trial, resulting in serious consequences;
(seven) other circumstances that should be corrected according to law. Article 9 Criminal, civil, economic and administrative cases handled by judicial organs and cases under execution are misjudged cases:
(1) Cases that have been corrected according to legal procedures;
(2) Deciding to arrest a person who has no evidence to prove the facts of the crime;
(three) the implementation of judicial custody for people who should not be in judicial custody according to law;
(four) the defendant illegally obtained a bail pending trial, which caused serious consequences;
(five) the illegal use of compulsory execution or property preservation measures, resulting in serious consequences;
(six) other circumstances that should be corrected according to law. Article 10 If any functionary of a judicial organ fails to file a case that should be filed according to law, fails to collect the evidence that should be collected, or fails to perform other statutory duties, thus causing serious consequences, he shall be investigated for responsibility according to the misjudged case. Chapter III Discovery and Confirmation of Misjudged Cases Article 11 Ways for judicial organs to discover clues of misjudged cases:
(a) the judicial organ corrects the case in accordance with legal procedures;
(two) the judicial organs to carry out law enforcement inspection and case quality inspection;
(3) the NPC Standing Committee's supervision over judicial work;
(four) the complaints and accusations of the parties;
(five) units and the masses to report;
(6) Transfer of other units. Twelfth to confirm the basis of misjudged cases:
(a) cases corrected according to law shall be confirmed on the basis of legal documents that have become legally effective after correction;
(two) cases that have not been corrected shall be confirmed on the basis of the original legal documents that have legal effect and the investigation or review conclusions of relevant functional departments;
(three) if the failure to perform legal duties causes serious consequences, the investigation conclusions of relevant functional departments shall be taken as the basis for identification. Article 13 When a misjudged case occurs in a judicial organ, it shall be confirmed by the judicial committee, the procuratorial committee and the director's office meeting of this organ in accordance with the provisions of the law and these Regulations, and a conclusion shall be made as to whether it is a misjudged case.
Misjudged cases in reeducation-through-labor cases handled by the examination and approval authority of the Municipal Public Security Bureau shall be confirmed by the office meeting of the director of the Municipal Public Security Bureau according to law.
When the municipal judicial organ deems it necessary, it has the right to confirm the misjudged case of the lower judicial organ according to law. Chapter iv division of responsibility for misjudged cases article 14 if a misjudged case is caused by the inaccurate information provided by the case-handling personnel, the case-handling personnel shall bear the responsibility. Fifteenth review, reconsideration, review personnel should correct the mistakes in the case and failed to correct, resulting in misjudged cases, by the review, reconsideration, review personnel and the undertaker respectively bear the responsibility; If a misjudged case is caused by the examiner, the reconsideration person or the reviewer denying the correct opinions of the case-handling personnel, the person who holds the wrong opinions shall bear the responsibility.