On My Country's Life Imprisonment

The 2015 Criminal Law Amendment(9)has provided for life imprisonment in article 383,paragraph 4 of our criminal law.From the point of view of legal doctrine,the requirement of "no commutation and parole" impedes the possibility of offenders returning to society,and there are conflicts and contradictions with the justified basis of penalties and the trend of mitigation of penalties.Under the premise of legislation,the key issue studied in this article is the legal positioning of life imprisonment,that is,the nature of the penalty of life imprisonment.On the one hand,due to the progressive legislative provisions on the application of Article 383 of the Criminal Law to life imprisonment,there is an intricate and logical relationship between life imprisonment and the immediate execution,reprieve and life imprisonment.On the other hand,due to the special restrictions on the applicable objects and enforcement methods of life imprisonment,it is difficult to find an accurate location for life imprisonment.Looking beyond the horizon,although many countries have positioned life imprisonment as a punishment that is severer than the death penalty and applicable to some serious violent crimes,starting from Article 383 of our criminal law,China's life imprisonment has strong Chinese characteristics.Carrying the expectation of immediate execution instead of the death penalty,it is also a special period of legal transplantation products,serving the anti-corruption policy.On the premise that the legal positioning of life imprisonment remains controversial,how to coordinate the life imprisonment with the penalty system in judicial application and better explain and apply is another focus of this article.First of all,judging from the existing cases of life imprisonment in China,the primary solution to the life imprisonment application by the judicial organs is the retrospective effect,but the practical judgment lacks a description of the retrospective effect of life imprisonment,and the relevant judicial interpretations violate the old It is easy to cause ambiguity if the principle of leniency is followed.Secondly,the provisions of Article 383 of the Criminal Law on the applicable conditions of life imprisonment are ambiguous,which may cause the judge to have greater discretion when applying life imprisonment,resulting in the immediate execution of the death penalty and the death penalty.The delimitation between suspended execution and life imprisonment after life imprisonment is blurred;finally,the implementationrequirements of "no commutation and parole" determined during the penalty determination phase conflict with the existing commutation and parole system.During the execution of life imprisonment,different execution results will be produced according to different performances.Based on the legal positioning and practical analysis of life imprisonment in this paper,and comparing the current status of life imprisonment system outside the territory,the author believes that it is not appropriate to expand the scope of life imprisonment at this stage.Sentencing can be used to clarify the conditions and restrict the judge's discretion.At the same time,new execution goals need to be restructured for life-time prisoners in the execution phase.By actively exploring the feasibility of applying the amnesty system to life-time prisoners,and improving the existing tiered treatment system and diversified correction measures,In order to solve the reform difficulties brought about by the absence of criminal rewards,China's life imprisonment can better exert its penalty function.