This is the ultimate goal of the "criminal record elimination system" proposed by many people in the legal profession some time ago. But why is this system proposed? Why does it get so much attention from public opinion? What kind of background is hidden behind it? These require us to discuss and think together.
Background: The criminal record retention system does have some disadvantages. First of all, in my opinion, the reason why the state keeps records of criminal records is really to better supervise people who have been in prison.
After all, a person who has committed a crime may still commit another crime after being released from prison. It is indeed necessary for relevant departments to strengthen control over these people.
But that’s the problem. With so many cases and so many suspects accepted every year, there will always be a small number of people who subjectively hurt people or cause property damage.
For example, a few years ago, several students were sentenced for digging up bird eggs in the wild. The person involved may not have realized that he was committing a crime, but accidentally dug up a bird's nest protected by the state, so he was tried and sentenced.
Perhaps in daily life, each of these students has the awareness to abide by the law. If they knew what they were doing was wrong, they would never and would not dare to do it.
This is an example of non-subjective malice, but after these students leave society, they may always have "criminal records" on their resume files.
For many employers, the first impression will directly reject such people. After all, many people in society will not and do not have the time to delve into why you have a "criminal record." They will only subjectively and directly put a negative brand on such people.
It is from the above examples that we can know that there is indeed a small number of people whose "criminal records" are non-subjective, harmless, and have not caused loss of life or property, but they have actually violated certain laws. According to this law, one must carry a "criminal record" for life.
The "extinction system" proposed by many people in the legal field is precisely because of this example. After all, in the opinion of a considerable number of people, if these people's "criminal records" can be eliminated, they will be able to better integrate into social life in the future.
What’s more important is that people in this situation have no subjective sense of malice, and some are even very law-abiding people. They don’t have to worry about what bad things they will do after their “records” are “eradicated.”
So after the news broke, there was indeed a lot of public opinion in favor of this proposal. However, behind the approval, a considerable part of the public still expressed concerns about the "criminal record elimination system."
Hidden dangers: Subjective judgment can easily lead to loopholes, and insufficient human resources are also a difficulty. Among the objections, they are nothing more than two objections based on "subjective judgment" and "human resources".
The first is "subjective judgment". Opponents believe that everyone is an independent individual, and it is difficult for others to judge whether there is really "subjective malice" in others' hearts.
For example, for those students who dug out bird eggs above, we are not the roundworms in their stomachs, and we have no way of knowing their inner thoughts at that time. Therefore, it is absurd to use other people's "subjective judgment" to judge whether a criminal record can be "expunged".
The second is "human resources". Some opponents believe that the scarcity of judicial resources is a fact that everyone knows.
In this case, if we want to sort out past cases case by case to determine whether the parties have "subjective malice", it will occupy too much human resources and human costs.
On the other hand, once human resources are insufficient, it may affect the advancement of normal judicial work. This is also one of the reasons held by many opponents.
In fact, regardless of support or opposition, the fundamental purpose is to promote the perfection and progress of the legal system. If you have any doubts or thoughts about this topic, you can leave a message in the comment area and discuss and share it with netizens~
Conclusion: All contents of this article are original by the author (between prisoners and prisoners) and have not been authorized without authorization. No organization, unit or individual may reproduce it without permission. The author reserves the right to pursue legal liability.