Home > Academics > Lectures

Professor Xiao Zhonghua Delivered a Lecture at the 60th Professors Salon about Analysis of Improper Penal Law Application in Judicial Practice

On July 8th, 2015, the 60th Professors Salon of Renmin Law School was successfully conducted in Mingde Law Building. The salon was themed as ‘Analysis of Improper Penal Law Application in Judicial Practice’, mainly spoken by Professor Xiao Zhonghua and hosted by Associate Professor Shi Yan’an. Dean Han Dayuan with other scholars and students also attended the salon.

Professor firstly aired his opinion about knowledge of communication problems between theory of criminal law and judicial practice because of lacking criminal law theory except for some human interventions, neither would they realized its significance for most people and in most occasions. On one hand, theoretical cycles partly recreated by themselves without keeping a watchful eye on practice; on the other hands, professional circles could not applied knowledge in proper occasions. Professor Xiao indicated that the application of penal law was actually the interpretation of the law. To be specific, there were mainly four issues.

  1. Whether hazard to society should be main factor of crimes. Professor Xiao applied cases like identification problems of crime of illegal business operations to interpret that criminal law application should examine criminal Illegality instead of hazard to society. Hazard to society normally guided criminal legislation.

  2. Whether regulations as legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime and strict interpretation could be criminal law interpretation. Professor Xiao indicated that it is understandable to stress modest and restrained principle of criminal law in theory while there was no meaning in judicial practice to apply these theories. The core of criminal law application was revealing what was legal, thus these regulations could not provide technical support. It was the same with strict interpretation because it was not beneficial to the defendant as well.

  3. How to comprehend ‘nullum crimen sine lege no crime ithout a la’. Professor Xiao thought that ‘nullum crimen sine lege no crime ithout a la’ was no equal to ‘crime could not be declared without specific regulation’. He applied absichtsdelikte as instance to claim that public prosecution organ should provide different evidence because absichtsdelikte included dominant type and recessive type.

  4. How to understand essential feature and constitutive requirement of crime. Professor Xiao thought that constitutive requirement of crime was specific, which meant that lacking of normal criminal feature did not equal to lacking of constitutive requirement.

After Professor Xiao’s report, scholars and students raised up their questions and got detailed answers. The salon ended with warm applause.

(Editor: Cheng Zeya)

© 2014 Renmin Law School | 59 Zhongguancun Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100872 CHINA 86-10-82500352
Contact us : ; Support :