Judicial Determination Of Crime Of Provocation

The crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles was decomposed from the crime of hooliganism under the criminal law in 1979 and became an independent charge.Experience more than ten years of development and perfection,and along with our country "criminal law amendment(eight)" in 2011 and July 2013,the supreme people's court,the supreme people's procuratorate about criminal cases dealt with troublemakers to explain some issues of applicable law(hereinafter referred to as the "explanation"),the objective aspects of stir-up-trouble crime has been further clear,alleviate the problems existing in the process of judicial practice,and concluded that in the process of obstacle,better embodies the criminal law to punish the criminal,the basic principles of protecting human rights.However,in judicial practice,there are still many problems in the use of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles.In judicial practice,it is still common to wrongly identify other illegal crimes as the crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles,so it is particularly important to analyze the judicial predicament of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles.About our country adopted the enumeration stir-up-trouble crime legislation pattern,the applicable conditions and scope of protection of the law,but this crime indictment description is too vague,together with the criminal object of crime and subjective motive controversial is bigger,so the resulting in the judicial practice interoperability is not strong,make this crime in the location in the specific provisions of criminal law system is difficult to grasp.This article through to stir-up-trouble crime criminal object,objective behavior,subjective motivation,and the concrete provisions of judicial interpretation of understanding and decided to explore,it analyzes the four stir-up-trouble crime behavior,at the same time with the determiner of subjective evaluation of color,such as what is a "vicious" and "serious" were described in detail,on the basis of general stir-up-trouble crime and intentional injury,robbery,arson,intentionally damaging property comparison,and other related crimes to summarizes a relatively clear boundaries between sin and the judicial cognizance standard,and hope can be helpful to the judicial practice case.