Research On Causality Of Malfeasance Crime From The Perspective Of Efficiency Of Responsibility Distribution

The causality of malfeasance crimes highlights the charm and difficulty of the theory of causality of criminal law.In the same case of malfeasance,if different causality theories are adopted,different conclusions may be drawn.The causative force synthesis of the causality of malfeasance crimes is very complicated.Judging the effect of malfeasance on harmful results by the general public opinions also has the problems of how to investigate the general opinions and the risk of collective violence.This paper adopts the method of economic analysis to study the causality of malfeasance crimes from the perspective of the efficiency of responsibility distribution,and tries to realize the regulation purposes of malfeasance crime laws under the condition of saving judicial costs,and abandon the fuzziness of social experience judgments.This has practical significance in reasonably defining the criminal liability of the perpetrator and restricting the scope of criminal responsibility in malfeasance cases,and can deepen the understandings and research on the theory of causality in criminal law.The paper is divided into five parts,totaling about 48,000 words.The first part: the particularity of causality of malfeasance crimes and the defects of the existing doctrines.The causality of malfeasance crimes is characterized by the complexity of causal synthesis,the ubiquity of intervention factors,and the diversity,delay,and heterogeneity of the results.The traditional theories of criminal law causality do not consider the efficiency of judicial resources allocation.The reason of limiting criminal responsibility by studying causality is not to protect human rights,but to achieve maximum social protection with minimal human rights costs.The traditional theories of causality also have the problem of fuzziness in social experience judgments and fail to prove the source of public opinions.The establishment of criminal objects to maintain the normal management functions of state organs,the universal application of condition theory in the judicial practice,and the overreaction of the public to malfeasance crimes intertwine with the particularity of causality in malfeasance crimes.Then,the defects of the existing doctrines are more prominent in malfeasance crimes.The contradiction between the judicial costs and the deterrent power of punishment has become prominent.A large amount ofsocial resources have been consumed,but the regulation purposes of malfeasance crimes have not been achieved.The interests of the victims have been seriously neglected,and the human rights of the malfeasance perpetrators have been seriously violated.The second part: the observation of criminal responsibility allocation efficiency in malfeasance crimes from regulation purposes.The purposes of researching on causality of malfeasance crimes are to imputation and realize the regulation purposes of malfeasance crime laws.The research content includes attribution,imputation and judging whether the imputation method has achieved the regulation purposes of malfeasance crime laws.In order to find the optimal path to achieve the purpose,we must first determine the purpose.Therefore,we must interpret the criminal responsibility distribution efficiency of malfeasance crimes by examining the purposes of malfeasance crime laws.Different understandings of the purposes of malfeasance crime laws will lead to different understandings of the causality of malfeasance crimes.Through the investigation of the purposes of criminal law and malfeasance crime regulations,we can find that the victim's status in the purposes of regulations is relatively low.If we do not improve the victim's status in the purposes of malfeasance crime regulations,then the judgment of causality of malfeasance crimes serving for this purpose is bound to ignore the interests of the victims.In order to improve the efficiency of criminal responsibility distribution in the causal relationships of malfeasance crimes,we should pay more attention to the protection of victims.From the perspective of regulation purposes,the realization of the efficiency of criminal responsibility distribution in malfeasance cases requires us to reduce the cost of human rights as much as possible to restore the harmful consequences caused by malfeasance and promote the prevention of malfeasance.The third part: the equilibrium relationship between efficiency and fairness of criminal responsibility distribution of malfeasance crimes.When discussing distribution,we must discuss the balance between efficiency and justice.For the distribution of criminal responsibility,human rights costs and victim utilities are measures of the efficiency of criminal responsibility distribution.Only when the state follows the principle of minimum human rights cost to "supply" criminal liability for the victims and the victims follow the principle of utility maximization to "consume" criminal liability can the efficiency of criminal liability distribution be realized(at the same time,the substitution effect of civil liability on criminal liability should benoted).Although this kind of efficiency is fair Pareto efficiency and the regulation purposes is realized in the process of pursuing this efficiency,the conflict between justice and efficiency exists objectively.One of the reason is that the concept of justice is abstract and vague,people have different understandings of justice,and it is difficult to achieve a unified understanding of the regulation order.Other reasons suggest the conflict is real,but not violent.Emphasis on the efficiency of criminal responsibility distribution does not lead to fatal flaws in justice.The fourth part: the path selection to realize the distribution efficiency of criminal responsibility in the causality of malfeasance crimes.Efficient distribution of criminal responsibility should make up for the damage with the minimum cost of human rights.How much effectiveness the victims can get from the application of the criminal law depends on the mode of responsibility on the one hand and who should bear the responsibility on the other.The type of harm result determines the way of responsibility which can maximize the victim's utility.But judicial resources are scarce.The optimal allocation of each penalty and the characteristics of marginal deterrence will affect the efficiency of judicial resources allocation.The least-cost avoider doctrine determines the responsible person who can maximize the victim's utilities under the constraint of human rights costs,and can turn the vague judgment of "the general experience of the public" into the concrete judgment of "the minimum cost of preventing harm results".The fifth part: the specific identification of causality of malfeasance crimes from the perspective of responsibility allocation efficiency.In order to realize the efficiency of criminal responsibility distribution,we are required to judge the effect of malfeasance on harmful outcomes according to the cost of consequences preventing of the person who engaged in malfeasance.If the cost is low,the effect is large.If the cost is high,the effect is small.The rationality of the malfeasant to bear criminal responsibility is that the opportunity cost of the direct aggressor to prevent the occurrence of the harm is too high.However,the harm result is not directly caused by the malfeasant,so the criminal liability of the malfeasant should be limited according to the cost of human rights.This section also uses the above theory to specifically discuss three practical cases.