| In recent years,as the supervision place of penalty execution organs,the duty crime cases in the "high wall" often occur.Taking the sun Xiaoguo case,which was selected as China’s top ten influential lawsuits in 2019,as an example,19 public officials were publicly sentenced according to law for their crimes of bending the law for favoritism,commutation of punishment for favoritism and bribery.After the amendment of the criminal procedure law,the procuratorial organs still have the power to investigate the 14 crimes in the criminal law.Among them,investigating and handling cases of favoritism,commutation of punishment and maltreatment of the supervised personnel can effectively punish and prevent the occurrence of illegal and criminal cases of public officials in supervision places,maintain the deterrent force of the law,and maintain the order and stability of the supervision place.However,in the process of investigating and handling cases,the understanding of the concept of the law is biased,the judgment scale is different,and the law enforcement environment is complex.Especially,the charge is only applicable to duty-related crimes in specific fields,and the frequency of application is not high,which leads to disputes on the nature of some cases.This paper starts with the focus of judicial practice cases,analyzes the cases of commutation of punishment for Favoritism in judicial practice,and summarizes the focus of dispute from the cases.The identification of favoritism and fraud is the core of many cases of commutation.This paper defines the specific meaning and legal nature of "favoritism" and "fraud" in commutation by introducing the meaning and procedure of commutation.Combined with the supervision practice of supervision places,this paper makes an in-depth analysis on the scope of "favoritism" and "fraud".In order to solve the disputes in judicial practice,this paper focuses on the rationality of the crime as a consequential offense,and negates the wrong understanding of behavioral offense,so as to provide solutions for accurately identifying the crime in judicial practice.From the perspective of commutation request,review,trial and other links,this paper analyzes the cognizance standard of the crime in the form of attempted crime,so as to standardize the nature of different malpractices for personal gain in each link of commutation request in judicial practice.Finally,this paper makes an in-depth analysis of the identification of malpractice for favoritism that should be commuted but not commuted,so as to provide legal thinking for solving the problem that should be commuted but not commuted in judicial cases.Through the case analysis,we can get the opinion on the controversial points of the case,clarify the judicial standard of the crime,so as to effectively crack down on and deter the crime,promote the commutation according to law,and maintain a fair and just judicial environment. |
