1in March, 1995, Dimou, a Hong Kong citizen, smuggled photographic equipment worth HK$ 500,000 from Hong Kong through the customs in Shenzhen Area A. With the approval of Shenzhen Public Security Bureau, Shenzhen A District Public Security Bureau decided to detain Dimou, but Dimou fled back to Hong Kong without success. 1April, 1998, Dimou smuggled cars from Hong Kong through Fuzhou County B, valued at HK$ 5 million. With the approval of Fuzhou Procuratorate, the B County Public Security Bureau criminally detained and arrested Di. Jurisdiction over Dimou's smuggling case. There was a dispute between Shenzhen A District Public Security Bureau and Fuzhou B County Public Security Bureau.
After the coordination of relevant departments, the jurisdiction problem was finally solved, and the final case was tried by C court in C city. Court C considered the case to be significant and complicated, and decided to submit the case to the C municipal government and the higher court for approval before the trial. With the approval of the municipal government of C, Dimou, a Hong Kong businessman, has invested heavily in C, so he should be given a lighter sentence. The high court also put forward some specific opinions on the handling of the case. According to the government's reply and the opinions of the higher court, the Judicial Committee of Court C made a judgment on Dimou's smuggling case, which was executed by the collegial panel during the trial.
Excuse me:
(1) Who is in charge of the smuggling case of Dimou, the Public Security Bureau of Area A and the Public Security Bureau of County B? What is its legal basis?
(2) According to the basic principle of dividing the jurisdiction of gold in China, who should be in charge of the smuggling case in Germany? Briefly explain why.
(3) What mistakes did Court C make in the process of hearing the case? What are the basic systems of criminal procedure violated by these mistakes? Briefly explain why.
answer
(1) Both the A District Public Security Bureau and the B County Public Security Bureau have jurisdiction. The legal basis is that Article 24 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that "criminal cases shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court of the place where the crime was committed."
(2) The basic principle of dividing criminal jurisdiction in China is that it is conducive to accurately and timely finding out the facts of the case and concluding the case. The criminal and the main crime place in this case are in County B, which should be under the jurisdiction of County B Public Security Bureau.
(3) The mistakes made by Court C are:
(1) The C court reported the case to the C municipal government for approval, which actually turned the case into a decision of the government department, which violated the principle that the people's court tried it independently according to law.
(2) Court C reported the case to the higher court for comments, which actually turned the second instance into the first instance, which damaged the defendant's appeal and violated the system of final appeal of the second instance.
(3) The judicial committee of our court discussed and decided the case before the collegial panel held a trial, which made the collegial panel unable to play its role and damaged the investigation and debate system in the trial of the Criminal Procedure Law.
Solution thinking
Questions (1) and (2) are under the jurisdiction of the examination. It involves the basic principles of determining and dividing jurisdiction, both legal provisions and legal principles. Question (3) examines the experiment, especially the principle of two independent experiments. The role of the two-instance system of final adjudication and the collegial panel in the trial of cases is relatively clear, and candidates can draw conclusions by finding out the knowledge points of the examination.
Detailed legal explanation
(1) Article 2 of the Provisions of the People's Court, the People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of National Security, the Ministry of Justice and the Legal Affairs Commission of the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) on Several Issues in the Implementation of the Criminal Procedure Law (hereinafter referred to as Article 48 of the Criminal Procedure Law) stipulates: "... the crimes specified in Chapter III of the Specific Provisions of the Criminal Law shall be under the jurisdiction of the public security organs? ; Jurisdiction in criminal proceedings in China refers to the division of labor system in which public security organs, people's procuratorates and people's courts accept criminal cases and try criminal cases of first instance within the people's court system. China's criminal jurisdiction is divided into two categories: one is the functional jurisdiction among public security organs, people's procuratorates and people's courts; The first is the trial jurisdiction between people's courts. The provisions of Article 48 of the Criminal Procedure Law clearly divide the functional jurisdiction of the public, the procuratorate and the law, so this case is under the jurisdiction of the public security organs.
(2) The main principles of dividing the jurisdiction of criminal proceedings are as follows: ① It is conducive to accurately and timely finding out the facts of the case, ensuring the quality of the case and realizing the task of the criminal procedure law; ② Rational division of labor, giving full play to the functions of judicial organs and the enthusiasm and initiative of judicial staff; (3) Facilitating litigants to participate in litigation activities; (4) It is necessary to have a clear division of labor and leave room for it, so as to combine principle with flexibility. As a lawyer exam, you can answer the main points. The determination of jurisdiction over the same case by two or more public security organs should be similar to the principle of determining regional jurisdiction between people's courts. Article 24 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates: "A criminal case shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court in the place where the crime was committed. If it is more suitable to be tried by the people's court of the defendant's domicile, it may be under the jurisdiction of the people's court of the defendant's domicile. " Among them, crime sites include crime preparation sites, crime implementation sites, crime result sites and stolen goods sales sites. Where the crime is under the jurisdiction of several people's courts, these people's courts have jurisdiction. In this case, the criminals and the main crime sites are in county B, which can find out the facts of the case more accurately and timely, ensure the quality of the case and realize the task of the criminal procedure law, so it should be under the jurisdiction of the public security bureau of county B.
(3) Article 5 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates: "The people's courts independently exercise judicial power in accordance with the law, and the people's procuratorates independently exercise procuratorial power without interference from administrative organs, social organizations and individuals." This is the first premise for the people's courts and people's procuratorates to do justice. Specifically, the people's courts and people's procuratorates only obey the law when examining and handling cases. The great significance of this principle lies in: firstly, this principle creates necessary conditions for the people's courts and people's procuratorates to correctly exercise their judicial power and procuratorial power, eliminates other improper interference from society, and ensures the purity, authority and fairness of judicial behavior; Secondly, the independent exercise of judicial power and procuratorial power is the fundamental prerequisite for the formation of a mutually restrictive relationship between public power, procuratorial power and law, thus laying a solid foundation for accurately punishing crimes and fully guaranteeing * * * *. In this case, the C court reported the case to the C municipal government for approval, and the administrative organ affected the trial result, undermining the principle that the people's court tried independently according to law.
② Article 10 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates: "When people's courts try cases, the system of final adjudication is implemented by two trials." That is to say, the trial of criminal cases by the people's courts ends after the trial by two people's courts, and the judgment or ruling made by the court of second instance becomes legally effective. According to the law, the person who has the right of appeal may not appeal against it, and the people's procuratorate may not protest against it according to the appeal procedure. It is of great significance to carry out the final judgment of the two trials: first, it can timely review and correct the invalid wrong judgment of the lower court, and help the higher court to supervise the trial of the lower court, so as to unify the maintenance of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties with the maintenance of the seriousness of the legal system; Secondly, it is not only convenient for the participants to participate in the litigation nearby, but also conducive to the timely conclusion of the case, making the court's judgments and rulings take effect in time, and realizing the litigation task of punishing crimes and protecting innocent people from criminal investigation. In this case, court C reported the case to the higher court for comments, which made the second trial actually become the first trial, which violated the two-trial system and frustrated the defendant's right to appeal.
③ The final stage of trial should be appraisal and trial. Appraisal is a litigation activity in which the members of the collegial panel analyze and judge the facts and evidence of the case on the basis of court trial, and make a decision according to law. As for the task of collegiate bench litigation, Article 162 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates: "According to the ascertained facts, evidence and relevant laws and regulations", a judgment shall be made on whether the defendant is guilty or innocent, what crime he has committed, what punishment shall be applied and the method of execution, or whether he is exempted from punishment. Generally, economic compensation is also dealt with in criminal incidental civil litigation cases. Article 1 14 of the Interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates: "After hearing and deliberation, the collegial panel shall make a judgment or ruling. If the collegial panel considers it difficult to make a decision on the following difficult, complicated and major cases, it may request the president to decide to submit them to the judicial committee for discussion and decision: (1) those who intend to be sentenced to death; (2) Members of the collegial panel have major differences of opinion; (3) The people's procuratorate lodged a protest; (four) have a significant impact in society; (5) Other matters that need to be discussed and decided by the judicial committee. " Therefore, the collegial panel submitted the case to the judicial committee for discussion without hearing, which made the collegial panel's trial ineffective and unable to play its role as a grass-roots trial organization.