On "violation Of State Regulations" In Criminal Law

Article 96 of the Criminal Code clearly define the'violation of state regulations'. However, theory and practice still have a lot of unknown questions. In order to regulate the judicial application of such accusations, guarantee the human rights of criminal suspects and defendants, it is necessary to discuss and clarify questions of 'violation of state regulations'.'Violation of state regulations' is not perfect, but still has the reasonable justification. Firstly, 'violation of state regulations' doesn't belong to enabling legislation. The State Set only can supplement, explain, argue, reiterate and limit the conviction. The State Set cannot be the basis for identification of crime individually. Secondly, 'the decentralized legislation mode' should be better. But 'violation of state regulations' provisions still have clarity. The 'violation of state regulations' is a relatively blank clause. The public can understand the basic constitution of crime and punishment from the Criminal Code provisions, and further understand the requirements of the constituent elements of criminal law, following the provisions of Article 96 of the Criminal Code. So 'violation of state regulations' clause does not violate the requirement of void-of-vagueness. The more realistic approach is to specify its application from the angle of the judicial application, rather than criticizing the legitimacy of'violation of state regulations'.The academia and practice circle have great confusion about how to select the state regulations. It should be noted that the 'violation of state regulations' is not overt constitutive elements. It belongs to legal elements, so the range should strictly abide by the provisions of Article 96 of the Penal Code, only this can balance punishing crimes and protecting human rights and guarantee the democracy and normative of the provisions. Changed national regulations equals to Criminal Code provisions, which shall hold to the'old and lighter' principle without exception. According to a blank clause referring to previous provisions of the state norms of criminal law, an act constitutes a crime, but when the regulations of the state repealed, the behavior should be processed innocently.On objective illegality, 'violation of state regulations' does not equal to criminal offense. According to the view of the Relativism of Illegality, 'violation of state regulations' is a necessary condition for a criminal offense, but not sufficient condition. Firstly, the State Set and criminal law are designed to protect different legal interest, therefore it's necessary to exclude some acts out of crimes which are against the state regulations but not against the Criminal Law. Secondly,'violation of state regulations' should be lighter than a criminal offense. State regulations may expand the range of penalties for administrative purposes, while as the most severe punishment criminal law should maintain its own modesty. When the behavior and harm is minor, it does not constitute a crime.Relating to 'violation of state regulations' category offense, we must firstly distinguish between cognition errors of facts and cognitional error in law. If people don't realize the elements of content elements, the people don't have intention of practicing crimes. If the people have a correct perception of the elements but lack of correct understanding of the law, we will have to further examine whether there is the possibility of knowledge of illegality. As the development of society and the advancement of age, knowledge of illegality becomes necessary in establishing crime. We could not deny the importance of knowledge of illegality because it's hard to be proved. The prosecution in the judicial process can take presumed proof method to relieve the burden of proof, the defense will have to pay attention to rebut the presumption.