The Cognizance Of The Causation Concerning Dereliction Of Duty

The cognizance of the causation theory concerning dereliction of duty has been one of the difficulties faced in the judicial practice,there are different opinions between the public security organ,court and procuratorate,or between the internal system at present,it often leads to appear the situation that diverse subjects adopt different theories in practical work,therefore it is often seen that similar cases have different treatments.Inconsistent cognizance standard leads to the public that cannot make a predictable determination on the basis of the legal norms for their actions,on the one hand it is harmful to judicial credibility,on the other hand it is a great shock to the guarantee of human rights.Based on the real case,this paper gives a brief introduction to different opinions appeared in the course of case discussion,deeply analyzes the root cause of divided opinions,which is caused by the inconsistent cognizance standard of causation.The inconsistency of the application is of paramount importance to whether the perpetrator constitutes a crime and whether it will be investigated for criminal responsibility.In view of the current judicial practice,it is a time node to put "file" as "heavy losses",namely starting from the offender behavior,but the focus of this case is whether a reasonable period should be set for the behavior of the perpetrator and the end of the reasonable period should be the starting point for dereliction of duty.The purpose of this paper is to explore a well-established approach to the cognizance of the causation concerning dereliction of duty and the start-stop time of "heavy losses".Except the introduction,the paper is divided into four parts,a total of 22421 words:The first part: it briefly introduces the case,and explains several controversial points in the process of the case;namely whether there are causation concerning dereliction of duty between actor's behavior and heavy losses;Wang and Zhang shall be responsible for how much loss.The second part: first of all,it analyses the basic connotation of dereliction of duty;second,it briefly describes conception of the causation concerning dereliction of duty,and characteristics,etc;and again,it focus on the theory of condition,the doctrine of cause,the doctrine of intervention,the theory of common possibility and the theory of objective attribution of the civil law system,the causation theory concerning between the double layers of common law system and the traditional inevitable causation theory,accidental causation theory.Based on the analysis of the rationality of each theory,it points out its defects and shortcomings in the application process.Through the comparative analysis,I believe that the article shall adopt the theory of condition judging the factual causalation connection;when judging the legal causal relationship,it shall use the objective attribution theory,it is both operable and able to solve the difficulties encountered in judicial practice;finally,it puts forward the conclusion that "the perpetrator should be responsible for the loss caused by his behavior."The third part: in conclusion,there is a causal relationship between the conducts involving dereliction of duty and heavy losses in this case,wang and zhang are guilty of dereliction of duty.In addition,I think that wang shall be responsiable for about 360 million losses,zhang is just responsiable for the damage caused by his behavior.The fourth part: the case has been several inspirations to judicial practice: first,the cognizance standard of the causation theory concerning dereliction of duty is depended whether has a rigorous logical system,whether follows the objective law for judgment;second,the cognizance of "heavy losses" can't take the way of "one size fits all",should adhere to the spirit of seeking truth from facts to the objective and impartial division of the loss.