Study On The Criminal Governance Of Officials In The Tang Dynasty

Official administration is an important part of the state governance in ancient China,and the emperors often took the official administration as an important goal of governance.One of the criteria to judge whether the rule of officials in a dynasty is to investigate how the dynasty governs official crimes,what effective mechanisms are formed in the process of governing official crimes,and how these mechanisms operate in practice.Focusing on the central problem of the criminal governance mechanism of officials in the Tang Dynasty,this paper first studies the guiding ideology of the official crime governance in the Tang Dynasty.In order to study the crime prevention mechanism,trial mechanism,death penalty execution mechanism and wrong case correction mechanism of officials in tang Dynasty,in order to provide useful reference for the construction of contemporary national governance system.From the structure of the text,the article is divided into three parts,the first part is the introduction.The introduction limited the senior officials of the Tang Dynasty to the officials with more than five grades,namely "pass expensive" in the law of the Tang Dynasty,and introduced the standards adopted in the collection of cases.According to the types of criminal objects,the crime types of senior officials in the Tang Dynasty can be divided into six categories: crimes of endangering national security and the dignity of imperial power,endangering social order and ethical order,infringing on personal health,dereliction of duty,corruption and bribery,and military crimes.Chapter 1 studies the guiding ideology of official crime governance in the Tang Dynasty.The guiding ideology of official criminal governance in the Tang Dynasty includes the thought of strict governance of officials and strict punishment.The starting point of the thought of strict governance is to maintain the stability of the imperial power and the stability of the people’s livelihood.This thought calls for cracking down on officials’ crimes to maintain the order of discipline,and also to balance the conflicts between different legal values.This thought requires the ruler to formulate a criminal policy of tempering mercy with severity,and to maintain justice and equality in the judicial trial.Chapter 2 studies the judicial identification of the common cases of official crimes in the Tang Dynasty.There are 25 common official crimes in tang Dynasty,which can be divided into five categories according to the different objects of the crimes,crimes of endangering national security,endangering social and ethical order,crimes of dereliction of duty,corruption and bribery,and military crimes.In the process of judicial identification of these crimes,the Tang Dynasty formed two tendencies: strict punishment and lighter punishment.The strict punishment refers to the expansion of the constituent elements of the crime and the method of adding punishment to increase the punishment of the criminal officials.A lighter punishment refers to the mitigation or exemption of criminal officials by means of discussion,request,reduction,redemption,depreciation,pardon and self-action.These two tendencies are not only influenced by the thought of strict governance of officials and strict punishment,but also influenced by the political and social factors in a specific period.Chapter 3 studies the crime prevention mechanism of officials in the Tang Dynasty.The Tang Dynasty adopted a combination of general prevention and special prevention to supervise the crimes of officials.The general prevention mechanism of official crimes in the Tang Dynasty included legislative prevention and supervisory prevention.In the legislative prevention,the law of the Tang Dynasty set severe penalties for officials’ crimes.Among the 25 common cases of official crimes in the Tang Dynasty,14 of the legal maximum punishment was death penalty,accounting for 60%.The monarch of the Tang Dynasty strengthened the deterrent effect of punishment by modifying the existing charges.This expansion explanation includes the expansion of crime subject,the expansion explanation of criminal behavior,and the statutory punishment of aggravating the original crime.The rulers of the Tang Dynasty also restricted the scope of commutation of officials,and in the late Tang Dynasty,the monarch restricted the scope of application of eight discussions and officials by means of making imperial orders.In the process of supervision and prevention,the Tang Dynasty set up an imperial history desk in the central government,appointed local inspectors,and set up records to join the army,forming a complete supervision and prevention mechanism.Through the supervision and prevention mechanism,the Tang Dynasty eliminated the potential criminal risks of officials,supervised all kinds of official activities of officials,timely reported the criminal acts of impeached officials,tried criminal officials,and put forward opinions on sentencing.The special prevention mechanism of official crimes in the Tang Dynasty includes two aspects.First,different punishment methods were adopted to educate and admonish the officials who could be reformed and severely punish the criminals who committed bad crimes.Second,to formulate targeted criminal policies in different periods.In view of rebellion,both Gaozu to Xuanzong adopted strict criminal policies.However,after the Rebellion of An Shi,Suzong gradually changed from cracking down on officials to seek,and finally turned to pardon all the officials involved.Regarding the crime of corruption and bribery,although the Tang Dynasty had always adopted a strict criminal policy,the implementation effect was significantly different in different periods.Chapter 4 studies the criminal trial mechanism of officials in the Tang Dynasty.The judicial mechanism of officials in the Tang Dynasty can be divided into three links according to the different procedures.If the local officials in the Tang Dynasty should be punished with flogging and stick punishment for crimes,the counties will directly make the ruling.Where a local official should be sentenced to additional punishment or redemption punishment for a crime,the state shall review and make a ruling in the name of each state.If a local official is sentenced to death for a crime or should be subject to expulsion,exemption or appointment,the state shall "write the case" and report to the Ministry of Punishment for review.The trial of official crimes in Dali Temple,Jingzhao Prefecture or Henan Prefecture should be reported to the Ministry of Punishment for review,no matter what punishment the criminal officials should receive.The second link is the special case trial procedure,which is specially set up for the application of the eight official crime cases,namely the hall.The third link is the service and declaration of the judgment.The judgment of the crimes of the officials in the Tang Dynasty was issued in the form of three documents: the emperor’s imperial edict,system and imperial edict,and delivered to the place of detention or exile.The judgment of official crimes is imperial edict,system and imperial edict,and the three genres are different in different periods.In the early Tang Dynasty and Tang Dynasty,emissaries were appointed by imperial officials,and in the middle and late Tang Dynasty,they were appointed by eunuchs.After the judgment is served,it shall be declared to the offender.In the judicial practice of the Tang Dynasty,eunuchs,ministers,local judicial military participation or Cao joined the army can be responsible for the judgment.After the judgment is declared,there will be a change of the judgment.As far as the result of the judgment is concerned,there are three kinds:exempted punishment,mitigated punishment and aggravated punishment.Chapter 5 studies the execution mechanism of criminal officials in the Tang Dynasty.Under the dual influence of strict governance of officials and strict punishment,the execution mechanism of officials in the Tang Dynasty showed complex characteristics in legislation and practice.On the one hand,for the sake of preserving the official dignity,tang law specified the official execution,execution time and place,execution and supervision authority,on the other hand,for specific political purposes,to crack down on official crime,in practice formed the rod kill,give death way,the execution from the city to willow and dog ridge ridge and other new execution practices.Chapter 6 studies the correction mechanism of the wrong cases of officials in the Tang Dynasty.The correction of official cases in Tang Dynasty includes the mechanism and accountability mechanism.In the mechanism of rectification,the initiation of wrong cases is divided into the emperor’s initiative,the minister on the initiative,and the minister according to the authority.A wrong case is usually issued in the form of an amnesty edict or a separate imperial edict.The results of the rebellion include the recovery of officials falsely accused,the restoration of their surnames and nationality,the burial of imperial tombs and matching temples,the restoration of their descendants,and the return of confiscated property.In the accountability mechanism of misjudged cases,all officials responsible for the occurrence of misjudged cases are held accountable,including officials who tortured them,officials who improperly tried them,and officials who improperly executed their penalties.These officials are given different punishments according to their own illegal acts.Conclusion part evaluates the characteristics of the crimes of the Tang Dynasty,the characteristics,influencing factors and effects of the crime governance of the senior officials in the Tang Dynasty.