|
Criminal Law Experts on Li Changkui commuted the d
revision reflects the corresponding crime reflects the mistakes must be corrected, reflects fairness and justice
Chen in: Li Changkui accused of rape, murder young women after they kill other innocent children, crime is extremely serious, although voluntarily surrendered themselves, but not enough to be given a lighter punishment, shall be sentenced to death. Li Changkui retrial commuted the death penalty reflects the corresponding crime reflects the mistakes must be corrected, reflects fairness and justice.
Gao: retrial commuted to better grasp the legal, policy and public opinion fully reflect the punishment fit the criminal law the principle of guilt, to achieve legal and social effects of unification.
commute is entirely correct and necessary, to truly safeguard the credibility and authority of the judicial
Chen in: That argument is debatable. Judicial authority is based on the referee on the basis of justice, only an impartial referee will have real authority. Contrary to the facts and the law of the wrong decision, not to mention the issue of whether the authority.
pursuit of justice, safeguard the legitimate rights and interests, our law provides for judicial supervision of procedures, allowing retrial to start to correct the referee does have the wrong effect; to maintain the stability of law, legislation and strict limit the retrial to start conditions, the lift is not conducive to the defendant's retrial held special care attitude. Retrial, does not mean necessarily change the res. Li Changkui commuted reprieve second instance the case inappropriate, a significant departure from the public on a fair evaluation, commuted the death penalty retrial is absolutely correct and necessary, is to truly safeguard the credibility and authority of the judiciary.
retrial abuse will damage the authority of justice should not be the case for other cases and Li Changkui simple analogy
Chen in: High Court trial in Yunnan Authority decided to retrial in line with current law. Retrial is an independent, full proceedings on the facts of the case, the applicable law to conduct a comprehensive re-trial. Yunnan separately formed a collegiate bench of the High Court case was heard, the Board identified the fact that according to the retrial, to discuss and decide the case commuted the death penalty, in line with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law. Criminal Procedure Law does not require the CRIC to be avoided in the retrial.
Chen in: criminal retrial procedure is a remedial special regime applies only to correct the individual does have the wrong effect referee. Should not be the case for other cases and Li Changkui simple analogy. Sentence of death penalty cases in the context of a different era to make, and was closely related to the judicial environment, and different times, different places, different circumstances, the judge will have some of the less favorable to grasp the scale differences are very normal, and completely comply with the law of the trial.
practice, the vast majority of cases are heard in public, there are some cases involving personal privacy, or minor criminal cases heard in public. Even the public hearing of the case, as far as I know, for the protection of privacy of victims, the victims reputation to maintain, take care of family emotions and other factors to consider, some of the victims involved in the plot such as fault, etc., the referee may not have clearly stated on the instrument, but does not hit the newspapers However, the court must consider in sentencing. Therefore, the referee can not be based solely on instruments or related reports that the simple analogy of the relevant cases, even inappropriate evaluation accordingly. Improper start or abuse retrial special program, not only will greatly damage the authority of justice, resulting in social chaos, but also very vulnerable to abuse of judicial power, the case against the legitimate rights and interests.
Li Changkui second instance the case inappropriate commuted reprieve, and can not explain China's current death penalty policy is problematic in itself
Gao: China's implementation of retaining the death penalty, strictly controlled, carefully apply the death penalty policy. This is also the party and the country's policy over the years. Retain the death penalty, in line with this stage of China's national conditions to meet the needs of public order situation, but the death penalty is the deprivation of life, after all, the most severe penalties, should be strictly controlled and carefully applied to ensure the death penalty applies only to a very small number of extremely serious criminal offenses.
People's Court on murder, robbery, rape and other serious criminals who endanger public security, and severely punished, the death penalty in line with applicable standards, determined the death penalty; the result of love, marriage, family, neighborhood disputes and other civil conflicts triggered by the murder, the defendant after the active compensation, the families of the victims to obtain understanding, and the defendant has the statutory mitigating circumstances, to fully reflect the policy, according to leniency, try not sentenced to death immediately. After several years of efforts, with the full assurance of quality of death penalty cases, applicable standards convergence, the number of death penalty cases has also declined; At the same time, the national social security situation is generally stable, serious violent crime, especially murder flat to down, and achieved good social effect, which is the Criminal Law Amendment (h) by repealing the death penalty for 13 violent crimes to create the conditions. Facts have proved that retain the death penalty, strictly controlled, carefully apply the death penalty policy, in line with China's national conditions, conform to international trends, is entirely correct.
needs to be noted that Li Changkui second instance the case inappropriate commuted reprieve, and can not explain China's current death penalty policy itself have any questions, just executed the policy process in handling cases when the deviation is isolated phenomenon. The judiciary in a pragmatic manner to correct deviations in time for retrial, it is the correct implementation of the embodiment of China's death penalty policy. Li Changkui case of the familial relationship between the parties, in the past have had the background to propose marriage, but the crime of rape is not a
surrendered just one of the circumstances into account when sentencing. Particularly serious as the crime itself, even if the surrender can not be lighter
Gao: Article 67 of the Criminal Code provides that ;. Surrender is a statutory sentencing that the offender and the judiciary to take with attitude, so should generally be considered to be lenient. Criminal 第六十一条 clearly states: Can be seen, the people's court in determining the penalty, the first is to consider the crime itself harmful to society, surrendered just one of the circumstances into account when sentencing. If the crime is particularly serious in itself, can not be surrendered even if the lighter. They accused Li Changkui Liansha case, there is rape, crime is extremely serious, be sentenced to death, even if the surrender is not enough to constitute a light punishment.
|