Study On The Criminalization Of"Not-help-people-in-danger Act" From The Harm Principle

Cases of not-help-people-in-danger have often occurred in China,such as the "Xiao Yueyue Incident" in which a little girl died because no one helping her and the "Indifferent Taxi Driver Case" where a girl was sexually harassed in the car,but the driver chose to turn a blind eye.The incident of not-help-people-in-danger reported always caused people to think about whether it is moral bankruptcy or legally dysfunctional? Is it necessary to criminalize the "not-help-people-in-danger act" ? The focus of the argument seems to be the relationship between law and morality,but from the long history of mankind,the relationship between morality and law can be difficult to distinguish clearly.It is only a mess to discuss whether it is criminalized or not,from the relationship between law and morality.Therefore,this article tries to find a more reasonable basis for the criminalization of the not-help-people-in-danger act by using the modified harm principle(referred to as the "Feinberg's harm principle")instead of from the perspective of legal and moral relations.In the first chapter,the author will conclude the exact definition of not-helppeople-in-danger act by analyzing three issues,which are the scope of the main subject of helper,the direction of the dangers,and the types of dangers.At the sametime,based on the introduction and comparison of the existing foreign legislation,I will sort out,analyze and evaluate the reason for the legislation of criminalization of "not-help-people-in-danger act".The second chapter mainly discusses Feinberg's Harm Principle to clarify that "harm" refers to the blocked state of interest,which is the result of the unlawful act or omission of others.At the same time,the two constituent elements of "harm" are analyzed as "obstruction of interests" and "illegal behavior".Feinberg proposes that welfare benefits are the lowest level of interest in obtaining or maintaining physical or mental health,material sources,economic assets,and political freedom with the characteristics of minimum,stability and continuity.Therefore,the law mainly protects welfare interests,but long-term interests that contain the most important elements of a prosperous life are not directly protected by law.Welfare interests are the best basis for making effective moral claims to others."Everyone has a corresponding moral right in terms of life,basic health,economic sufficiency,political freedom,etc." Any irresponsible and unlawful infringement of the welfare interests of others is harm.Chapter three mainly discusses the criminalizing of not-help-people-in-danger-act can be consistent with the principle of harm in two ways.If we adopt the initial,somewhat vague explanation of the principle of harm,it is clear that it is criticized for the act.Because whether it is a law that prohibits people from causing harm or a law that requires people to prevent harm,according to their internal logic,both require that harm is avoided,and its legitimacy is fully supported by the initial principle of harm.On the other hand,according to the Feinberg's harm principle: the act of helping people in danger is different from the act of unilateral beneficiary,not a gift of unpaid benefit,nor does it force a person to assume an incomplete obligation(such as contributing to charity),on the contrary,the person in distress has the moral right to claim morality for those who have the ability to rescue without unreasonable risks,costs or obstacles.Even if we must admit that the criminal law's requirement for theimplementation of bailouts does weaken people's control over their own affairs,compared to the typical criminal prohibition,these interventions of freedom can easily reduce by limiting the harm we are obligated to prevent to the extent of serious injury or death.And there is no significant moral difference between harm and unchecked harm,especially in the case of bad Samaritan law,in which only minimal effort is required,its purpose,motivation,and the degree of harm corresponds to the situation of positive causality.Therefore,it is morally legitimized to criminalize the dangers of saving others' lives by not having any unreasonable danger or loss to themselves or a third person.However,it is not appropriate to criminalize all the "not-help-people-in-danger act",otherwise,it will cause excessive interference in personal freedom.However,starting from protecting the life safety of the person,criminalizing the dangers of saving others' lives without any unreasonable danger or loss to themselves or a third person does not violate the principle of modesty of the criminal law,will not be against the individual freedom and will not causes excessive interference.At the same time,it can form a system of "reward and punishment combined" to better realize the regulation of the phenomenon of danger.Finally,it mainly discusses issues such as the constitution of crimes,the setting of penalties,and judicial determination.