On Several Issues of Crime of Causing Traffic Casualties
Yan Chengji
(School of Law, China University of Political Science and Law, Changping, Beijing 102249)
Abstract: As a multiple crime, traffic accident crimes exist in large numbers in judicial practice, seriously endangering public safety. There are still controversies in the theoretical circles on several issues of the crime of traffic accidents. For these controversial issues, this article will discuss from three perspectives: the constitution of the traffic accident crime, the accomplice issue of the traffic accident crime, and the difficult identification of the traffic accident crime and other crimes. The purpose is to solve the judicial problems and better protect. Civil rights.
Keywords: traffic accident crime; joint crime; crime constitution
Chinese Library Classification Number: D920.0 Document Identification Code: A
1. Discussion on the subject and object of the crime of traffic accident
Traffic accident crime is a common crime. According to incomplete statistics, more than 100,000 people die in traffic accidents each year. Therefore, the correct determination of whether a criminal act violates the crime of traffic accident will be more conducive to the realization of the purpose of punishment.
(1) Discussion on the criminal object of traffic accident crime
The academic circles' disputes on the constitution of the traffic accident crime mainly focus on the object of the traffic accident crime. Any kind of behavior will cause a kind of infringement on the legal interests. It is generally believed that the object of the crime of traffic accident is the safety of transportation. The transportation includes railways, waterways, highways, and aviation. But some scholars have put forward different views on this conclusion. There is a view that the object of the crime of causing traffic accidents is the safety of people’s lives and property and the normal order of transportation. Article 133 of my country’s "Criminal Law" stipulates: "A major accident occurs in violation of traffic and transportation regulations, causing serious injury or death, or causing major losses to public or private property..." It can be seen from this that only harmful consequences occur. According to the crime of traffic accident, the author agrees with the latter view: the object of the crime of traffic accident should include the safety of people’s lives and property. This is more conducive to highlighting the protective function of the criminal law and conforms to the essential characteristics of the socialist criminal law.
(2) Discussion on the subject of traffic accident crime
Regarding the subject of traffic accident crimes, academic circles have reached a consensus that the criminal subject of traffic accident crimes is the general subject, and both drivers and non-transportation personnel can be the criminal subjects of traffic accident crimes. However, there are two discussions about how non-transport personnel constitute the crime of causing traffic accidents. One point of view is that the crime of causing accidents by non-traffic personnel only constitutes the crime of causing traffic accidents when they are engaged in transportation. Another point of view is that as long as driving a motor vehicle commits an illegal or criminal act and causes a major traffic accident, it should be handled as a traffic accident crime. Regarding this, the author agrees with the first point of view. The author believes that in the current environment of a risky society, our country should adopt strict but not strict criminal policies. If major traffic accidents are not necessarily traffic accidents, the perpetrator needs to be considered. The second view expands the scope of application of the crime of causing traffic accidents, causing confusion between this crime and that crime.
From the above discussion, it can be concluded that the object of the crime of traffic accident is the safety of traffic and transportation and the safety of citizens’ personal and property. The subject of the crime of traffic accident is the driver engaged in transportation and the non-transportation personnel in the transportation under certain circumstances. .
2. Discussion on accomplices of traffic accident crimes
The Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Traffic Accident Crimes issued by the Supreme People’s Court in 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Interpretation) Articles 5 and 7 respectively stipulate the crimes of instigating others to escape and instigating others to drive in violation of regulations to cause traffic accidents. Treated as an accomplice. However, my country's criminal law theory believes that a joint crime is an intentional crime committed by two or more people, so there is a contradiction that the crime of traffic accident as a negligent crime still has the provisions of a joint crime. Whether this regulation is biased requires an analysis of these two behaviors.
(1) Analysis of the behavior of instructing others to escape
The criminal law of our country separately stipulates aggravating penalties for the two acts of escape after a traffic accident and death due to escape in the crime of traffic accidents. The perpetrator has caused a harmful act while driving, and the perpetrator’s subjective mentality should be negligent. Is it a negligent negligence or an overconfident negligent actor always does not want this harmful result to happen. Regarding the question of whether there is indirect intention in the crime of traffic accident, the author believes that it should not exist. Indirect deliberate has a laissez-faire mental attitude, and neither rejects nor opposes the occurrence of harmful results. The perpetrator driving a traffic accident must be undesirable. If he has a deliberate mental attitude, it may constitute other crimes. However, after the accident, if the perpetrator drove away and ignores the lives of others, then the perpetrator has a deliberate mental attitude at this time. The author believes that this deliberateness should be indirect deliberate. Judging from judicial practice, most of the perpetrators escaped by driving because they were afraid of punishment and took a chance to avoid risks. If the perpetrator drives a vehicle and causes a traffic accident, the perpetrator has the obligation to protect the scene, rescue the wounded, and even report to the police. If the pedestrian has no intention to escape and the motor vehicle is owned by other people in the political and legal view, such as the motor vehicle If a person, contractor, passenger, etc. instigate or instigate the driver of a motor vehicle to escape, the person who instigated the escape at this time has a common rescue obligation with the driver, and the perpetrator does not perform this rescue obligation and has a deliberate mentality at this time Attitude constitutes a crime of traffic accident. Here, the driver has a negligent psychological attitude towards the occurrence of the harm result of the accident, and for the subsequent escape behavior, the driver and the instructor have a common intention, and the instructor is established on the basis of this behavior. A joint crime of traffic accident crime.
(2) Analysis of instigating or forcing others to drive in violation of regulations
The explanation holds that: instigating or forcing others to drive in violation of the regulations constitutes a joint crime in the crime of traffic accidents. The author believes that this view is still open for discussion. The nature of the instigation and forcing acts shows that such acts are of a coercive nature. The crime of causing a major traffic accident by driving in violation of the regulations to constitute a traffic accident is certain. The author has different views on whether the instigator and the forcing person constitute the crime of traffic accident.
Different from the above-discussed behavior of instigating others to escape, this kind of instigation and coercion will directly lead to the occurrence of harmful results to some extent, while the instigator and coercion have a deliberate mentality towards this behavior. Attitude, the harmful result is carried out under the influence of the instructor or the coercive. If this behavior is defined as the crime of traffic accident, it does not conform to the nature of the crime of negligence. For this kind of behavior, the author believes that it is more appropriate to stipulate the crime of a major accident.
If a person with management and supervision responsibilities instructs others to drive in violation of regulations and cause major casualties and harmful consequences, his behavior has the characteristics of a person who violates the supervision and management function, and conforms to the “violation of relevant safety management in production and operation” as stipulated in Article 134 of the Criminal Law As a result, a major safety accident or other serious consequences occur...forcing others to take risks in violation of regulations, causing major injuries or deaths or causing other serious consequences. Therefore, the author believes that under this condition, the behavior of the perpetrator constitutes The crime of causing traffic accidents, and the act of instigating or forcing others to drive in violation of regulations constitutes the crime of major liability accident.
3. The problem of discrimination between traffic accident crime and other crimes
As one of the crimes of endangering public safety, traffic accident crimes frequently appear in judicial practice. Therefore, it is of great significance in judicial practice to clarify the difference and connection between traffic accident crime and other crimes. The following author will focus on distinguishing the relationship between the crime of traffic accident and the crime of dangerous driving, the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means, and the conversion between the crime of traffic accident and the crime of intentional homicide.
(1) The relationship and difference between traffic accident crime and dangerous driving crime
The crime of causing traffic accidents and the crime of dangerous driving are both crimes of frequent traffic safety, which are easy to confuse in our judicial practice. The criminal law of our country provides narrative provisions on the crime of dangerous driving, that is, only four specific situations can constitute the crime of dangerous driving, namely: chasing and racing, driving a motor vehicle while drunk, engaging in school bus business or passenger transportation, Severe overloading, speeding, and illegal transportation of dangerous chemicals endanger public safety. Therefore, the crime of dangerous driving is a crime of behavior, regardless of the perpetrator's subjective crimes. Once driving a motor vehicle on the road has the above four behaviors, regardless of whether the harmful consequences occur, it constitutes the crime of dangerous driving. The consequence of a traffic accident crime must be a serious traffic accident that causes serious injury or death to constitute a crime. When the perpetrator drives a motor vehicle to carry out the four kinds of behaviors stipulated in the crime of dangerous driving, and a major traffic accident occurs concurrently, the crime of dangerous driving shall be applied as a special crime over the crime of causing traffic accidents due to the overlapping of laws and regulations.
(2) The relationship and difference between the crime of causing traffic accidents and the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means
The criminal law of our country classifies the crime of causing traffic accidents and the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods as sex crimes, indicating that both the crime of causing traffic accidents and the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods will cause damage to the lives and property of an unspecified number of people. The crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means refers to a specific dangerous act committed by the perpetrator that poses a threat to public safety with the same nature as arson, explosion, poisoning, etc. When the perpetrator uses public transportation to harm an unspecified majority When human behavior and specific danger occur, when this kind of danger has the same nature as arson, explosion, and the dropping of dangerous substances, it will constitute the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods and not be punished as the crime of traffic accident.
(3) Handling of murder after the crime of traffic accident
In judicial practice, this situation often exists: the perpetrator hides the injured victim for fear of legal sanctions after the traffic accident, so that the victim loses his life because of excessive blood loss and lack of timely assistance. In this case, the perpetrator’s traffic accidents led to the occurrence of the traffic accident. The traffic accident caused the perpetrator to be injured but did not reach the harmful consequences of death. At this time, the perpetrator has the obligation to send the victim to the hospital even if it is rescued. The perpetrator did not fulfill this obligation but hid the victim, causing the victim to lose too much blood and die. Because the perpetrator did not perform the necessary rescue obligation and the result of death occurred, the perpetrator’s behavior constituted the crime of intentional homicide of omission. The perpetrator carried out two acts and caused two harmful consequences, so these two acts of the perpetrator were treated as multiple crimes.
Summary: The above author discusses the subject and object of the traffic accident crime, the discussion of the accomplice issue of the traffic accident crime, and the discrimination between the traffic accident crime and other crimes. The purpose is to analyze the judicial difficulties of the traffic accident crime. Problems, so as to better protect citizens’ property and personal rights.
references:
[1] Gao Mingxuan, Mark Chang. Criminal Law (Eighth Edition) [M]. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2017.
[2] Yu Jian. Crime of Endangering Public Safety [M]. Beijing: Law Press, 1999.
[3] Wu Jialin. Legislative reflection and improvement of traffic accident crime [J]. Journal of Liaocheng University, 2016 (1): 101-107.
[4] Liu Yuan, Yang Cheng. Discrimination of the problem of accomplices in traffic accidents [J]. Law, 2014 (4): 156-160.