Study On The Crime Of Disrupting The Order Of The Court

After three formal deliberation, the Ninth Criminal Law Amendment overwhelmingly passed in August 2015, a highlight of which was the modification of crime of disrupting the order of the court, and this is the first time that the crime has been modified since 1997.There is a special background of modification of crime of disrupting the order of the court:In recent years, the behavior of disrupting the order of the court often occurs, and the ways of it become various, in result, provisions before can no longer meet real needs. In order to protect the order of the court and the authority of the law,modifying the provisions is the most important thing. After modification, the crime of disrupting the order of the court includes more behaviors, and it is meaningful for protecting the order of the court.However, the values of laws can be developed just when it is used. So, making the meaning of provisions clear is the first thing. Because of lacking relevant judicial interpretation, the application of the new law becomes difficult. So making proper understanding to the new law is very necessary. As we all know, there is no perfect law. In order to find advantages and defects of the law, making its meaning clearly and contrasting it to similar laws abroad is an ideal way. If judicial organizations can avoid the defects by applying to the provision cautiously when the defects are found, the authority of law can be protected and the value of the law can be developed. For this thesis,in order to make the crime of disrupting the order of the court develops its whole value, I have studied it according to venation above from the point of the Ninth Criminal Law Amendment. Concretely specking, in the first part of this thesis, I analyzed the accusation of the crime in detail through the ways of consulting dictionaries, searching references,etc. I hope I made reasonable explanation for the four accusations and make readers have a correct understanding about this crime. For the second part,I studied relevant laws abroad, including The Contempt of Court Act of Britain and relevant laws of France, Russia, Germany and Japan, and reached the conclusion that relevant laws abroad relate to more behaviors, and have low standard of incrimination and specific criminal punishment. In fact, the whole content of this part is the foundation of the last part.For the reason that I studied the crime of disrupting the order of the court from the point of the Ninth Criminal Law Amendment,I stated the background and process of correction about the crime firstly in the third part, so readers can know the reason why legislators corrected the crime like that.After made comparison based on two parts above,I evaluated relevant provision about the crime of disrupting the order of the court, including its advantages(for example,behaviors and standard stipulated by the crime is reasonable) and defects(for example,penalty about the crime is heavy and vague). For its defects, I advised judicial organizations to avoid them by applying to provision cautiously, and concrete measures have been given, for example, I advised judicial organizations not only to focus to the specific cases, but also to consider the results of similar cases in nationwide to solve the problem that the criminal punishment is not clear. As long as judicial organizations apply to provision according to measures given above, the authority of the law can be protected and the application of the provision can become easier.