The Legislative Study On The Crime Of Huge Unidentified Property

As a typical charge of presumption in the criminal law system of our country, the crime of huge unidentified property has a clear utilitarian purpose when it appears and there are many differences with other charges in terms of provision set. It is the most controversial crime in the specific provisions of criminal law. In the judicial practice, the inherent defects of this crime inevitably cause the judicial practice of dealing with difficulties, the function of punishing and preventing crime also play hard. In this article, it starts from the general legislation situation and the value of the crime of huge unidentified property to analyze the crime constitution and provisions of this crime. To learn the successful legislative experience from abroad and rethink the defects of this crime in the legislation of our country so that we can come up with some suggestions to help this crime modify.This article is divided into five parts altogether:The first part introduces the legislation evolution of the crime of huge unidentified property. It introduces the legislation history of this crime since it set up in 1988 and the relevant judicial interpretations and policy documents emphatically. In the same time, it makes an analysis on the aspect of modifying the content of this crime.The second part is the legislative value analysis of the crime of huge unidentified property. It mainly introduces two aspects of the legitimacy and necessity of this crime’s establishment, and it thinks that this crime is not in violation of the rules of the criminal litigation proof rule and the principle of presumption of innocence. The burden of proof still undertaken by the prosecution, it is not the burden of proof upside down, and it does not belong to the presumption of guilt. The establishment of this crime is the result of utilitarianism and justice value balance. It is the result of weighing the pros and cons of two evils choose the lesser of rational choice, and it is rational and valid.The third part is the analysis about the component elements of the crime of huge unidentified property. Due to the particularity of its provisions, the crime constitution also has a lot of controversy. It surrounds this crime’s constitution article to discuss, and focus on the analysis of this crime’s objective aspect behavior. The perpetrator can’t explain property source is the reason why this crime is punishable and it is the perpetrating act of this crime. The perpetrator hold the property is a precondition for this crime; The subject is limited to national staff and non-national staff do not have the necessary conditions to be a perpetrator; The subjective aspect is intentionally; The object of this crime is the integrity of national staff.The fourth part is the analysis about the crime of huge unidentified property’s shortcomings on the legislation. This crime plays an important role in anti-corruption in judicial practice, but also becomes the shelter of the corrupt officials. The main reason is the insufficient legislation system of this crime. Through the provisions set about this crime in China to analyze the defects of our current legislation setting, this deficiency is mainly embodied in the following three aspects:Firstly, the indictment set is not reasonable. The subject who has the authority of commanding the national staff to explain the source of property is unknown, and there are some expression problems. Secondly, the legal punishment of this crime set unreasonable. The legal sentence set lighter and doesn’t fit the crime. The amount of crime division and the classification of punishments are unreasonable, and the legal sentence type is single. Thirdly, we do not have the property declaration system to support.The fifth part is the analysis of the legislative perfection of the crime of huge unidentified property. Under the framework of the existing legislation about the crime, we should learn successful legislative experiences rationally from other countries and Hong Kong area. The improvement of the specific path is put forward to solve the existing problems in our country: "The national staff can be ordered to explain the source of the property" should be replaced by "after the investigative organization order the national staff explains the source, the national staff should explain". Adjust this crime legal punishment and sentencing standards, in the same time, the property penalty need to be add to perfect the legal punishment of this crime punishment system. We should make the relevant property legislation so that we can establish the property declaration system. At the same time we can add to the declare property crime in the criminal law provisions.