Comment On The Case Of Assembled Pruriency Committed By Ma Et Al

The crime of assembled pruriency committed by Ma et al which happened inNanjing in2009has been called a case of "Wift swap". The court conviction andpunishment Ma et al by the crime of assembled pruriency which paid great attention bythe law academia and the sociology academi. The controversy focus is that Ma et al’sbehavior is constituted the crime of assembled prutiency or not, and the assembledprutiency can be regulated by criminal law or not. Assembled pruiency is the behaviorthat gather all to collective sexual immorality. The people who is the principal offenderand the multiple participants will be punished with the crime of assembled pruciency inour country. Form the constitutive requirements of assembled pruriency, the behaviorof Ma et al imperfect conform to the constitutive requirements. At the first place, Ma etal did assembled pruriency or join in the activites of assembled pruriency many times;At the second place, Ma et al have definite comprehend of the result which theassembled pruriency will endanger society, and decided to do so. It is conform to thesubjective aspects of the crime of assembled pruriency. At the third place, theassembled pruriency’s main body is general subject and multiple participants. Without adoubt Ma et al conform to the assembled pruriency’s main body requirements. But Maet al’s behavior not conforming to the assembled pruriency’s objective requirments, Inthe level of should however, assembled pruriency will can’t within the general headingof criminal law. First, the essencal feature of crime is serious harmfulness to society.Which worth investigat criminal responsibility. Assembled pruriency possesses definitejeopardize to the society, but it less than the extent of injury by criminal law to thesociety. Second, it is the substantive demand of nullun crimen sine lege that punishmentthe behavior which can not be punished. It isn’t conform to the principle of guilt thecriminal law to decide that put assembled pruriency into the crime circle. Third, the"ultima ratio penalty" demand tightly and supplemently of criminal law. Criminal lawcan be the last resort to the regulated illegal activities. It is it is inconformity to the"ultima ratio penalty" that put assembled pruriency into the crime circle. So, it isnecessary to non crime of assembled pruriency, and make assembled pruriency intogeneral illegal activites.