Study On The Possibility Of Illegal Cognition In The Background Of Excessive Objectivism

Excessive objectivism tends to refer to the phenomenon of heavy objective factors and light subjective factors in the process of criminal identification in China.From the perspective of the nonnative system,the formation of this phenomenon is related to the "The doctrine of negating illegal understanding " that is still in the general status in China's judicial practice.Focusing on the suppression of illegal objectivity and its possibility to over-objectivism,this paper will analyze and explain the arguments in three parts.The first part begins with the objective tendency of legislation and the excessive objectivism of judicial practice,revealing the relationship between excessive objectivism and illegal understanding.In detail,the occurrence of any phenomenon is a product of a specific historical period.The advent of the statutory era of crimes has caused the conflict between the traditional "Don't know the law is not exempted,principle and the"Presumption of law,bankruptcy.The negative general view of prevention represented by the doctrine of negating illegal understanding has caused excessive objectivism tendencies such as the lack of subjective normative evaluation elements of crime,the confusion of subjective imputation system,and the basis for the loss of purpose punishment.This tendency violates the principle of responsibility and legislation of crime accompanied by the risk of human rights violations.which is contrary to the requirements and performance of the new criminal law in China.The second part discusses how to introduce the illegal consciousness into the criminal law system and how to suppress the excessive objectivism.The status of illegal knowledge as the subjective normative evaluation factor is lacking,and the impact is related to the entire criminal law system.On the one hand,from the perspective of the balance between subjective and objective,in the case that China already has a relatively perfect objective accountability system,it should affirm the normative value of illegal understanding and its possibility,and distinguish the subjective factual elements and normative elements of crime.It prompts China to form a sound subjective imputation system that first judges psychological facts and then evaluates value.On the other hand,in the scope of criminal responsibility,by using illegal knowledge and its possibility as a sign of judging whether an actor is loyal to the norms of law,under the premise of maintaining the effectiveness of responsibility and clarifying the scope of guilt,it can not only promote negative general prevention to positive general prevention,but also the subjective factors affecting the effectiveness of special prevention,such as the anti-normative attitude of the perpetrator and the dangerous personality,can be considered from the stage of sentencing to the stage of conviction.Finally,the tendency of excessive objectivism is limited by improving the overall status of subjective factors in crime theory.The third part focuses on the understanding of illegality and the feasibility of its possibility,and analyzes relevant legislation and theory at home and abroad.Standing on the position of effectiveness that is conducive to illegal understanding and reasonable use of responsibility for relief in practice as soon as possible,it is necessary to affirm the possibility of illegal understanding and the possibility of using illegal understanding as the subjective element outside the regulations.In addition,in tenns of the application of the possibility of illegal understanding in the trial process,the possibility of illegal understanding should be transformed into the inevitable of illegal mistakes,and the system design that can be operated is combined with specific applicable rules such as presumption,perpetrator standards,and objective accompanying conditions.Finally,from the judicial system,the purpose of suppressing the tendency of excessive objectivism in our judicial practice is achieved.