| People surviving in the social life are not just satisfied with the current state, butoften change from the "chaos" to "order". The formation of order and the Code ofConduct have tied up tightly, and maintenance of order needs the specification, butmore management. Therefore, Abiding by the Code of Conduct is the basic state tomaintain social order. The spring of 2003, when China faced with a sudden outbreak ofSARS period, China's "first case of SARS in criminal case, new trouble-making casestirred up into people's eyes; Fang attack case of 2010 again attracted much attentionbecause of the defendant, the victim, public opinion's consensus as "an irrelevantjudgment"; the crime of creating trouble has become a staple of issues after thenetwork covered Star II li beating case.Disturbing the crime which stems from China's 1979 Criminal Code ofhooliganism is a new offense, also a unique offense in the Criminal Law. It, as "smallpockets" crime, is one of more controversial and difficult decidable crimes in practice,which have roots in mainly lawmakers'adoptions of the "ambiguous" statements to settheir guilt, which statements endowed with a great deal of uncertainty, also made thejudiciary is often in a dilemma during the application based on this uncertainty.Lawmakers further enriched stir-up-trouble crime behavior and content in thepromulgated criminal law amendment (eight), In fact, the meaning of the crime ofcreating disturbances itself would be pretty broad, together with the attention oflegislation by increasing the content of the behavior, this crime played the importantrole step by step and develops toward expansion, step by step towards a "free" of sin.Legislation takes the way of listing on stir-up-trouble crime, regulates a variety offuzzy behavior, in which the most important thing is the lack of behavior level limit,that is, as long as implementation of stir-up-trouble crime prescribed behavior andcaused certain result, the stir-up-trouble crime could be convicted and punished. Inaddition, if "input disturbances" happen, that is to say, the actor in the public placeimplements behavior and cause public order chaos, he or she will also be convictedand punished as stir-up-trouble crime name when no more appropriate criminal law article cannot be found to define in the specific charges, such as the case of Householdjumping the Jinshui Bridge. However, since our criminal law has established theprinciple of a legally prescribed punishment and has a culture, we have been told thatthe flexibility of the law must be based on this, any criminal legislation and judicialshould try to be avoided when they don't match the principle of a legally prescribedpunishment. Therefore, how to accurately understand and grasp the essence of thestir-up-trouble crime, to configure indictment reasonably, to limit degree of plotclearly, to avoid the inflation of stir-up-trouble crime in small areas are the problemsthat the judicial practice departments face every day, also are the major issues thatshould be discussed by the criminal theory circles.This article will adjust and find new information of causing disturbing crime byforming the "problems" systematically. The article will probe into the basic problem ofthe stir-up-trouble crime from its source, and re-examine the essence of stir-up-troublecrime. The establishment of the legislation content needs full and detailed theoryresearches, mature and complete theoretical basis can provide the guidance of benignrulemaking. Therefore, the article is based on the criminal law and judicial explanation,and combines the actual case, analyzes the object crime to cause trouble, analyzes thecharacteristics of stir-up-trouble crime and crime standards, and the key and difficultproblems in the judicial practice, radically combs stir-up-trouble crime in asystematical and deep way so as to give help to the development of the theory ofstir-up-trouble crime in the future.The first part is to comb stir-up-trouble crime legislation. In the evolution process,stir-up-trouble behavior for content legislation was established as early as in the TangDynasty period, and developed gradually after the Song, Yuan, Ming, Qing dynastygeneration, and modern period. Legislation for behavior of causing trouble has itscharacteristics in the past, such as Tang Law. Its main feature reflects in the law thepunishment in the management. It formulates different punishment methods accordingto the criminal mentality of subjective and different distinguish the result of weight.Secondly, a visit to the mainland legal system country, British and American lawcountries and China's three special legislations were finished in the region about tocause trouble to the rules of behavior, and the contrast of the advantage and shortagewas done for legislation. Again, comb the present situation of China stir-up-trouble crime legislation, found that the period of the legislation of the crime of hooliganism ison the overall broad and wide change, and the period of the legislation of stir-up-trouble crime legislation presents the close and dense. Finally, this paper discusses thecriminal policy and stir-up-trouble crime. It importantly goes into what the state oflegislation presents under diverse criminal policy in different period, it is with thecombination of wide punishes criminal policy; under the policy to crackdown onstir-up-trouble crime legislation, it mainly reflects the state of severely punished, in thethree national scale in the crackdown and every time as an important target of attack onthe stir-up-trouble crime. The criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy "understir-up-trouble crime on the state of the overall width, has been to the amendment ofcriminal law (8) of the promulgation of the implementation, this fully embodies thecriminal policy of tempering justice with mercy" the basic spirit of the mastery in thewhole criminal legislation.The second part is to investigate basically crime object of stir-up-trouble crimeproblem. In this part, the basic theory problems are discussed, then the definiteconclusion are made, mainly the theory support for the further specific problem areprovided. In our country criminal law educational world about stir-up-trouble crimeobject of the crime of expression, there are three main points, one is direct object andpublic order; the second is Complex object, public order and person and propertyrights; the third one is Direct object, social fashion. Views state from different anglesthe object and what crime connotation its object is. In author's opinion, theclassification of crime object is different, so we need to make evaluation from the samelevel, specific to stir-up-trouble crime, we can say the direct object of the stir-up-trouble crime is public order; Or stir-up-trouble crime is a complex object, the mainobject is public order, random object is person and property rights. How to summarizethe connotation of the crime? It must comply with requirement of the principle of alegally prescribed punishment, and cannot separate the concrete standard requirementfrom criminal laws, also can't be departed from explanation of the principle. Therefore,combining an abstract connotation of public order with the article 293 the criminal lawon the stir-up-trouble crime specific provision, and defining the criminal object ofstir-up-trouble crime as public security, both be beneficial for playing the function ofcrime object, and for determination of stir-up-trouble and identification of trouble anddifficult case of qualitative behavior. The third part is to analyze objective behavior problems of stir-up-trouble crime.According to the provisions of article 293 of the criminal law, the provisions of articleeach charge are attached behavior with "plot requirements", if the circumstances areserious, flagrant, it can cause public disorder. In the legislative request, it is fullyappointed judge in judicial. Under the condition of without clear legislativeexplanation and judicial interpretation, a lot of similar cases can be caused differentresults. Further, general illegal behavior and stir-up-trouble crime's boundaries notclear, simultaneously a variety of behavior coexist boundary is not clear. Article 13 asthe center with criminal law ascertains stir-up-trouble crime objective behavior intocriminal standards. At the same time, stir-up-trouble crime is the story made as a basisfor the judgment on plots. Finally, stir-up-trouble crime standard analysis can be as thereference on specific plot factors. As for the analysis of the various behaviorscoexisting, there exists mainly "comprehensive evaluation party" "alone evaluationparty". In author's opinion, two kinds of views each have their truth, but that shouldalso have the concrete analysis. We should compare and analyze the different situationsin accordance with the logic relation of the article respectively to "public securitypunishment law Article 26, and article 293 of the criminal law are compared andanalyzed.The fourth part explores stir-up-trouble crime's subjective aspect of the problem.The stir-up-trouble crime purpose and crime motive will be discussed in detail.Theorists generally introduced that the stir-up-trouble crime is intentionally subjectiveaspect, and put special emphasis on its purpose: to obtain a crime affecting mentalstimulation, to breed disturbance to happy for fun, so as to fill the empty inside, etc.Criminal motive topsy-turvy, honor or confusion abnormal psychology, to despisecountries law and social morality as a hero, inspect the law for incompetence, etc. theyalso believe that crime motive and purpose are the difference between stir-up-troublecrime and other crime. The author thinks that, stir-up-trouble crime do not have rascalmotivation or for spiritual stimulation on the purpose, the motivation and purpose ofthe additional completely belong to the theory, that the reason is because law regulatesthat the behavior of stir-up-trouble crime and other crimes interact, once the sameconsequence appears, the specific investigators will be disoriented. The above twocrimes appeared the same results, such difference between two the burden of crimenaturally go to the subjective and looking for the difference. The theory to impose stir-up-trouble crime "have" special purpose will become the unwritten rules ofpurpose to make, and essentially random or any other actor beating damage to property,explains the actor "special purpose" subjective unprepared. In addition, criminalmotive doesn't belong to one factors of the crimes, it does not affect the compositionof the crime and criminal offence. Criminal purposes is just one of the subjectiveaspects, not the necessary part of it, therefore, it does not have the function todistinguish this from the other.The fifth part is the analysis on legislation tendency on stir-up-trouble crimelegislation. Born out of the hooliganism, stir-up-trouble crime defects in legislative.When judicial practice faces chaos, many academics expresses, some of them said thatit should be abolished, and others agree its exist but should be changed. The authortends to abolish stir-up-trouble crime. First of all, based on the requirements of thecriminal legislation purpose, the criminal law is not to maintain the ethics, but focuseson protection from criminality violations of law benefit, and this law's benefit is notclear. Secondly, the author's theory is based on the requirements of the principle of alegally prescribed punishment. Finally, the author is based on the "small defects do theharm. What the abolishment refers to in this article is on the basis of establishment ofresolution, so as to construction of voiding all the forms of emphasis on maintainingpublic order of crime, and the construction of the crime is also the test of legislativetechnology.
|
PDF Full Text Request