The Study On The Method Of Execution Punishment Of Public Surveillance

Public surveillance, which was generated in the revolution period of China, hasstrong times characteristics since the beginning of its creation. Public surveillance is aprimary means to control counterrevolutionaries. In addition, in accordance with theprevailing situation and policies, the counterrevolutionaries subjected to publicsurveillance commit lighter crime. Public surveillance is a lighter sanction measure to"treat the counterrevolutionaries in accordance with different situations". So itpossesses the characteristics of light punishment since its creation. In terms of theenforcement of public surveillance, at its creation, a policy of combining thespecialized agencies and the masses is applied, which is derived from the mass lineespoused by our party in early years of the new nation; moreover, emphasis had beenmade on the supervision by the masses on the surveillance offender in quite a longtime. Accepting public surveillance in the masses, but not adopting the way ofimprisonment, makes it possess the characteristics of sociality.China’s1979Penal Code, for the first time builds modern public surveillancesystem, and public surveillance has had its own system since then. Under the saidpenal code, criminals are not allowed to be imprisoned, the People’s Courts has beenmade clear to be the judge of public surveillance and, the public security bureau hasbeen made clear to be the execution subject, etc. Hereto, public surveillance hasbecome an important part of penal code in our nation. After a period of time, a debateon the existence or abolition of public surveillance occurred amid the low applicationrate thereof. Both those supporting the maintenance and the abolition of the publicsurveillance have been supported by well-known scholar and strong arguments;however, the lawmakers retain the public surveillance in such a context which showsthat our attitude towards public surveillance is comparatively pragmatic and rational.Especially, the prohibition of imprisonment shows the concept of socialization ofexecution punishment which corresponds the latest trends of international penal code.In particular, attention of lawmakers on public surveillance is paid to the revision andimprovement thereof. In2011, lawmakers once again chose to retain and improve public surveillancein Amendment VIII to the Criminal Law, which has substantially changed publicsurveillance and, for the first time, introduced the community corrections in criminallaw as well as the criminal injunction system, to enhance the intensity of publicsurveillance. The confirmation of years of experiment on community corrections incriminal laws is the response to the international socialization of executionpunishment. It essentially demonstrates our determination to implement the publicsurveillance in a more scientific way and close to the world trend, but also reservesmore space for improving and enriching the application matters of public surveillancein legislative system.From the development process of public surveillance listed above, we can seethat the debate over the existence and abolishment of the public surveillance hasactually been reflected at the legislative level; although public surveillance is retained,in fact, it has changed a lot when compared with the earliest connotation of publicsurveillance, from which, we believe that: Under the premise that public surveillanceis reserved, its penalty function constantly normalizes and its educational function ismore society-oriented, which will continue and will affect the future development ofpublic surveillance. It is the historical development trend that should be grasped whenwe study the public surveillance.After the debate over public surveillance, the investigator should firstly payattention to its connotation and value. The open style of execution on publicsurveillance complies with the trends of international penalty and the concept ofsocialization of execution punishment, and it enables to carry forward theaccomplishment of punishment purpose. On the perspective of the penalty theory,public surveillance possesses the comprehensive punishment purpose. It not onlypunishes crimes, but also corrects crimes through social circumstance. The loss ofeither side will shake the real effect of public surveillance and do harm to thereasonableness of its existence. The existence of the public surveillance can reflect thehumanity and tolerance of our penalty, so they will not become more dangerous dueto their serving of custodial sentence. At the same time, public surveillance is also auseful platform for restorative justice; compared with the current system of criminalreconciliation, public surveillance, as a penalty of restriction of freedom, does notimprison prisoners; therefore, public surveillance can create a more favorablecondition for restorative justice work. In terms of criminal legislation, public surveillance, as a restriction of freedom, makes our penal system more scientific. Inthe horizontal system, there are not only freedom penalty and life sentence, but alsoproperty penalty and qualifications punishment, or depriving of personal freedom, orcreating restrictions on personal freedom; so, public surveillance cannot be strippedfrom the penal system; in terms of the judicial value, public surveillance can enhancegovernance over the criminal punishment, build a misdemeanor sanctions regime,moderately expand the crime ring and enhance the density of laws to cope with thevast number of minor offenses, which will help reduce our doctrine of severepunishment. In addition, public surveillance can be helpful for the prisoners’re-socialization in practice, which is determined by the advantages of the surveillance;the efficiency pursued by the judicial practice is also the aspect that should bereflected by public surveillance; the vast application of public surveillance is bound toreduce the frequency of a sentence of imprisonment, thereby reducing the relativelyhigh justice cost of imprisonment.Amendment VIII to the Criminal Law introduces community corrections andcriminal injunctions into public surveillance, which makes the way of execution moreopen. From the perspective of legislation, it clearly establishes the concept ofsocialization of execution punishment, and straightens out the executive system andways, which makes the social execution punishment have rules to follow and laws toabide by. In return, it orderly carries out the concept of socialization of executionpunishment. However, after the current system of community corrections and criminalinjunctions were officially introduced in the public surveillance, the marginalizedstatus thereof still has not been fundamentally improved. Therefore, this articleanalyzes problems included in the practice process of community corrections andcriminal injunctions. In terms of legislation, as the core content of the communitycorrections, its legislative level is too low; and the administrative organization ofjustice, as the applicable body, is unbalanced in rights and liabilities; correction ineducation to criminals is not complete; the evaluation system to personaldangerousness regarding applying criminal injunctions is not perfect; the operabilityof criminal injunctions is not strong; the legal consequence of violating criminalinjunctions is weak; and the legal supervision of community corrections and criminalinjunction is not effective, and so on. To solve the above problems, this articlepresents the following perfect proposals:(1) increase the legislation level ofcommunity corrections, and publish the Community Corrections Act;(2)enhance the power of executive body;(3)balance the rights and liabilities of executive body incommunity corrections;(4)enact evaluation detailed rules and regulations of personaldangerousness;(5)introduce people’s supervision and information platform ofsupervision;(6)enhance the supervision of execution link of criminal injunctions;(7)explicit the executing organ’s division of labor which in charge of criminalinjunctions, and make it seamless joint;(8)enhance the legal supervision mechanismof community corrections and criminal injunctions, and so on.Public surveillance is our nation’s original created punishment through therestraint of liberty. Its open style of criminal execution coincides the concept of thesocialization of execution punishment, and it complies with the trend of internationalpunishment. Criticism on public surveillance can be treated as people’s goodexpectations. Therefore, we should analyze the present problems regarding publicsurveillance, and give it a good prospect.(1)On the concept of punishment, thepolitical inertia that China’s traditional doctrine of severe punishment and severelystriking criminal policies brought still influences the administrative justice. Underthe influence, it influences the application of public surveillance, which makes itsusage rate low. Although public surveillance has been remarkable increased comparedwith the criminal code in1979, the prescribed accusation of public surveillance is lessthan other similar accusations. The application of public surveillance on criminallegislation lacks scientificity. Aiming at the above problems, the followingexpectations are put forward:(1)on the concept of criminal justice, promote theconcept of light punishment, and on this basis, gradually optimize the assessmentindicators of the criminal justice activities, and let the public accept the concept of thesocialization of execution punishment;(2)amplify the range of application of publicsurveillance, for instance, for special subjects or negligent criminals on criminal laws,which under the premise of “social harmless” and“low personal dangerousness”,applicate public surveillance to special subjects to the greatest extent and applicatemore public surveillance to negligent criminals.