Study Of Accomplice Issues Of The Crime Of Organizing, Leading Or Participating In Terrorist Organization

In recent years, increasingly frequent terrorist activities have aroused great attention of the party and the country. As a response to the severe and complicated current situation of anti-terrorism, the paper to study the crime of organizing, leading or participating in terrorist organizations(hereinafter referred to as “the crime”)-this important charges at the core of terrorist crimes, trying to conduct in-depth study of this crime as an accomplice in perspective. The full text focuses on the following five aspects:First, this criminal behavior research. Behavior is the basis of all crime study, this crime include organizational behavior, leadership behavior, participate and actively participate in behavior, different behavior have different characteristics and implications. Compared leadership behavior with organizational behavior, the biggest difference is that organizational behavior essentially is a voluntary act on the principal of equality, but leadership behavior is based on the order or direction; The biggest difference between participate and actively participate behavior lies in the perpetrator’s subjective enthusiasm have different degrees. Different behaviors can be translated with each other and have different properties depending on the transition path.Second, discussion of random complicity and necessary accomplice. This section focuses on the difficult issue of this crime classification accomplice theory. Theorists about this there has been a misunderstanding, that is whether the crime is a necessary accomplice or not. This misunderstanding is mainly based on the following causes: First, the misreading of the main complex, which is about equal terrorist organization to necessary accomplice of the main complex; Second, behavior common misreading, that is misunderstand convergence behavior as a common behavior, which is also considered complicity set up among terrorist organization between no intention communication perpetrator; Third is a misreading of the stage acts, is about the confusion of the crime and terrorist crimes subsequent stage, so wrong to think that since follow certain terrorist crimes for more than a common criminal, then this crime is certainly a necessary accomplice. Whether it is necessary accomplice of this crime should analyze specifically, we can’t generally considered accomplice in this crime as necessary.Third, the legal classification of complicity in this crime. Our complicity statutory taxonomy is combination of role classification and division of discrete. Accomplice identified in the crime with a certain uniqueness, this section focuses on the following issues: First, the organizers and leaders of the terrorist organization under normal circumstances are principal sin; Second, participants under normal circumstances are accomplice; Leader, active participant under normal circumstances are not coerced offender; Fourth, abetting the member of organization or abetting members of outside terrorist organizations to commit crimes should be different in the conviction and sentencing.Fourth, issue of complicity between the selectivity charges. This crime is a selective charges, standing the theory of the behavioral common, the behavior may establish complicity between different actors committing this crime, accomplices of this crime include three cases, namely same sub-charges accomplice, complicity between the different sub-charges, accomplice coexistence between the same and different sub-charges. Sentencing of selective charges of complicity is a major difficulty for studying this crime, after selecting the appropriate penalty margin if continued to invoke the general provisions should be taken to avoid repeated evaluation.