Font Size: a A A

A Comparative Review Of Perpetrator-by-means

Posted on:2007-08-29Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:C C ChenFull Text:PDF
GTID:2166360212977440Subject:Criminal Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
The theory of perpetrator-by-means is built on firm foundation. The Criminal Code of Germany, Japan and some other countries divide the guilty party into Principal, Abettor and Aider. And it also establishes actus reus as a standard to limit the constitution of a crime. A principal is one who directly commits the crime. The guilt of an abettor and an aider rests on principal's wrongful act. Then,in cases of using an innocent agent to commit a crime, the user doesn't directly commit the crime, therefore he is not a principal. Since the innocent agent's act is not a wrongful one, which indicates that the user can't belong to a principal, we can not conclude that the user is an abettor. In order to categorise the user as a principal, we amend the concept of principal which approves that a perpetrator-by-means is a principal. Obviously, the division of principal and accomplice together with subordinate nature of an accomplice are bases of the theory of perpetrator-by-means. In U.S. and Britain, the theory of innocent agent comes into being because of the difficulty that the principle of accessory can't solve cases of using an innocent agent to commit a crime. But the theory of perpetrator-by-means falls in hot water in dealing with crimes concerning particular class or nonproxyable actions. Making it a crime to cause an innocent agent to commit the actus reus of a crime is thought to be an appropriate solution. It is in accord with treating guilty parties equally. But it will make the theory of perpetrator-by-means a redundant.According the correlative provisions of attempted abetment and attempted crime in the Penal Code of the People's Republic of China, we must punish the attempted abettor in principle. It basically negates the theory that an abettor is subordinate to his principal, and also negates the possibility of establishing actus reus as a standard to limit the constitution of a crime. According to the concept of single-principal, whoever directly commit any act constituting an offense, or aids, abet, counsels, commands, induces, or procures its commission, is a principal. This concept is consistent with the provisions of punishing attempted abettor in principle and of complicity, so it should be adopted. According to the concept of single-principal, cases of using an innocent agent to commit a crime can be dealt with properly.
Keywords/Search Tags:Perpetrator-by-means, Subordinate Nature of Accomplice, Complicity
PDF Full Text Request
Related items