Research On The Act Of Escape Of The Traffic Accident Crime

Since the new Criminal Code has been published, for the second and third crime and punishment phases of the traffic accident crime, that is after the crime has been committed, what is the application and subjective element of the act of escape, there has been a fierce debate among academia. If the act of escape can be appraised independently, and if there has accessory of traffic accident crime, such questions has also been argued recently. All the issue has been the result from the conflict of the traditional theories of Criminal Law and meanings of the articles of Criminal Law. I think the key point to solve this problem is ascertaining the aim of punishing the act of escape. Then we can make sure the meaning of the act of escape in the circle of the Criminal Law.The first part of this article is about the issue of the act of escape. What is the aim that Criminal Law put the act of escape into the article of the traffic accident crime?Is it because one does not carry out the duty that one should call the police after he/she committed a traffic accident crime? Or it is because one does not carry out the duty that one should help the casualties after he/she committed a traffic accident crime. Or both should be the reason. We can conclude from the intention of the legislators that the reason is that one does not carry out the duty that when he/she committed a traffic accident crime he/she should help the casualties. However, it does not mean the act of escape after committing the crime does not have the aim of escaping from the punishment. It is not the essential standard of distinguishing the act of escape that should be punishment by Law from the common act of escape. The intention that we punish the act of escape after a traffic accident is to avoid the severer result, the substantial right of living, that could happen. The subjective element of the act of escape should include the factor that one must know he/she has committed a traffic accident crime. The intention is to avoid the punishment by laws including Civil Law, Criminal Law and Administration Law. No matter escaping simply or escape moving the victim, the aim both are to avoid the punishment. This is the hinge to definite the objective element of the act of escape. In our Criminal Law, the act of escape is appraised in the second and the third crime and punishment phase, however, whether it is the reasonable, we should make more discussion. For the question that if the act of escape should be appraised independently, I think we should check if there is a new kind of benefit been damaged first. Also we should integrate the research with the issue of escape leading to death together.The second part of this article is about the issue of escape leading to death. The meaning of escape leading to death is that one does not carry out the duty of helping victim after he/she committed a traffic accident crime and this act leads the death of the victim. The death of the victim results from the act of the escape. After the traffic accident, the subjective element of the person who caused the trouble should include indirect intention and recklessness. In the actual situation, the two subjective states both can exist and can not be distinguished. The benefit that the traffic accident crime means to protect is the uncertain and numerous person's lives, health and safety of property. When someone does not carry out the duty of helping the victim, it may cause the severer result that is the life, healthy of the victim. When the escape leads to the death of the victim, the benefit is the right to live, at this time the benefit is certain and definite. The result of the traffic accident crime is the certain and definite one. The person who committed the crime can keep the result from coming worse. At this moment, if the person does not carry out the duty of helping the victim, whom he/she violated can be nailed down. This is definitely different from the benefit of uncertain and numerous persons'lives and health. If someone does not carry out the duty of helping the victim and he knows that the victim may die, the act of escape can be appraised independently and form another kind of crime. According to the different situation, the act of escape can be appraised as murder, traffic accident crime, traffic accident crime and abandon crime.The third part of this article is about the issue of the act of inciting others to escape. The article 5 of the Interpretation of Several Issue Concerning the Application of the Traffic Accident Crime, published by the Supreme People's Judicial Court of PRC at Nov.10th .2000, prescribes that after the traffic accident, the supervisor of the driver, the owner of the motor vehicle, the contractor or the boarding person incite the driver to escape, and lead the victim death, it can become the accessory of the traffic accident crime. Scholars provided all kinds of opinions for this article. Some supported and others opposed. However, any opinion can not appraise the act of inciting escape accurately. Except for considering the article itself, we should analyze the relationship between the intention of the legislation and the act of inciting escape. Then we can find the answer. The interpretation of the Supreme People's Judicial Court of PRC aims to punish the act escape severely. It intends to avoid the huge loss of the traffic accident. For the act of inciting escape, according to the different subjective element, we can appraise it as different crime. person who incites the escape and driver who committed the traffic accident crime can only be the accessories of the murder or the abandon crime, but the accessories of the traffic accident crime. When the act of inciting escape accords with the element of the shelter crime, it should be appraised as this crime.