On Application Of Capital Punishment To Crime Against Property

Crime against property is always the crime which is punished stressfully by our country's criminal law. Capital punishment is usually the most severely method which is used by the legislator to punish this crime. However following the development of criminal constitutionality, whether capital punishment should be used for nonviolent crime leads to broad attention of theoretical circle. However, though the amount of related articles is huge, the amount of articles related to the application of capital punishment to crime against property is small, and most of them are similar in content. They often abandon the instruction of general provision, straightly comment the application of capital punishment to a certain accusation in crime against property and then draw the conclusion that the capital punishment should be abolished. In fact, this method has no abundant theoretical basis and practiced meaning, so causes the readers to feel something lack.The present situation makes the author feel it is necessary to research systematically the application of capital punishment to crime against property. The thesis sets out from the requirement of application of capital punishment in general provision——crime is very severe, interpret it abundantly and analyze the reasonability of the application of capital punishment to crime against property. The author hopes to make a little contribution for the research on it in this way. The thesis can be divided into three parts:The first one is retribution and utilitarian: two degrees analysis on the requirement of application of capital punishment"crime is extremely severe".In this part, the author analyzes the requirement of application of capital punishment"crime is extremely severe"in general provision on two angles of retribution and utilitarian. Analyzing on retribution, we can see that criminal law rules"evil"which harms the society severely as crime and set relevant criminal punishment, it is not only a retribution against this evil, but also a balance between the pain exerted by criminal law and the evil caused by the criminal. Capital punishment is the most severe criminal punishment in punishment system. Once it is adopted, the criminal must lose his life, other rights will also disappear certainly. In the author's opinion, only the most severe crime whose degree reaches"extremely severe", capital punishment should be applied. The author analyzes this problem on subjective and objective aspects of crime, finally, through comprehensive analysis on the maximum evil of crime, draw the lowest level: the crime is extremely severe. That is, at least, the criminal directly intently trespasses other's life adding to other severe situation.Seeing from utilitarian, the severity of criminal punishment should be suitable for the requirement of anticrime. That is to say, what degree of criminal punishment is suitable for the requirement of anticrime decides the application of criminal punishment. If light or heavy of the degree was beyond the requirement, the application would not conform to the basis of utilitarian. Since capital punishment is the most severe, it is necessary for the application of it to conform to the biggest demand of anticrime. The author analyzes this part on the demands of general anticrime and specific anticrime and draws the conclusion that the crime at least trespasses the life and health of the victim when the degree of demand of anticrime is biggest.The second part is general evaluation of application of capital punishment to crime against property.In this part, the author evaluates generally application of capital punishment to crime against property on the basis of the analysis of upper part. It can be divided to three parts. The first one is the summary of application of capital punishment to crime against property in our country. In the second part, through analyzing on utilitarian and retribution, the author draw the conclusion that"extremely severe"refers to such a situation: not only has the crime trespassed the legal interest of property, but also it has trespassed the life and health of the victim, and the relevant factors which affects the interest of property are rather severe. According to the general provision of criminal law, it should be applied to capital punishment. The third part is the general evaluation for the reasonability of application of capital punishment to crime against property.The third part is application of capital punishment to crime against property in sub-provision.In this part, the author analyzes the application of capital punishment to crime of theft and crime of robbery on the basis of upper part. In crime of robbery, the legislator rules eight specific situations to take emphasized protection and arrange the most severe criminal punishment. What we should pay attention to is, except for the fifth one, in other seven situations, if death or serious injury occurred, in the author's opinion, all of them should be classify into the fifth one. In these seven situations, the application of capital punishment is not for death or serious injury. Then, what is the basis of it? The author elaborates the reasonability of application of capital punishment in the eight situations, and finally draws the conclusion that only the fifth one can conform to the standard of"crime is extremely severe"and should be applied to capital punishment. In the other seven situations, whatever degree the factors affecting the crime reach the application of capital punishment should not be suitable because of no severe harmful consequences.In the analysis of the application to larceny, the author points that the subjective aspect of larceny is directly intentional and contains the purpose of illegal occupation. Analyzed the subjective damage, the interest offended by larceny is only the property. Larceny is a typical kind of crime against property. The subjective behavior of larceny is secret theft without violence or threat by violence; hence larceny is no harm to human's life or health. We disgust the value of the interest of property and the interest of human's life, and obviously the interest of human's life is more important. According to this view, the damage of larceny is not severe enough to executing capital punishment. The standard of"crime is extremely severe"requires the crime should offend both the interest of property and the interest of human's life, and larceny is not consistent with the standard. Criminal law formulates capital punishment to financial institution larceny and precious cultural relics larceny. The legislators mainly consider the importance of the objection, arena, tremendous value and the severe social damage of the behavior. The author refers that there are some problems in legislation techniques, and financial institution larceny and precious cultural relics larceny don't offend the interest of human's life, we can take some measures such as confiscation of property and recover money and property illegal obtained to remedy. It means the exaggeration of object of crime is not the reliable conditions to execute capital punishment. So the capital punishment to financial institution larceny and precious cultural relics larceny is not reasonable. Otherwise if we compare larceny to other crime against property without application of capital punishment, we can see the application violates the principle of"criminal punishment should be suitable to crime."So larceny is not consistent with requirement of"crime is extremely severe"to application capital punishment.