On The Affirmation Of Confession-to-Justice After The Crimes Committed By Organizations

Criminal subjects in this country are jointly made up of organizations and natural person. Relevant issues about confession-to-justice after the crime committed by natural person are definitely stipulated in the criminal laws in this country, however, whether confession-to-justice can be established after the crimes committed by organizations or not and how to punish are not mentioned. There are extensive disputes about whether criminal organizations can become the subjects of confession-to-justice or not in theoretical circles of criminal laws in this country. Confession-to-justice by organizations can be established in the crimes committed by organizations, which are stipulated in with regard to opinions on certain number of problems about affirming confession-to-justice, meritorious performance and other circumstances for sentencing in conducting criminal cases by taking advantage of duty printed and distributed in March, 2009 by Supreme People's Court and Supreme People's Procuratorate, however, how is the establishment of confession-to-justice by organizations affirmed and the punishments after the establishments of confession-to-justice by organizations are not stipulated definitely. Four problems in confession-to-justice of organizations are pointedly discussed in this paper. That is, the introduction of the system of confession-to-justice by organizations, constitutive requirements for establishing confession-to-justice by organizations, special problems in affirming confession-to-justice by organizations and the punishments and legislative perfection of confession-to-justice by organizations.The first part in this paper is unfolded around whether confession-to-justice can be established by organizations or not and whether confession-to-justice by organizations has legal grounds or not. First, all kinds of theories and doctrines about current confession-to-justice by organizations in this country are enumerated by the author, after affirmative theory and negative theory are evaluated and analyzed, the author thinks that, although the problems about confession-to-justice after the crimes committed by organizations were not mentioned in the criminal law issued of 1997 and organizations are acknowledged by the criminal law to exist as the criminal subjects, organizations which have the plots of confession-to-justice after committing crimes should be applied the processing mode of the confession-to-justice by natural person according to the principle that crimes and punishments in criminal law are on speaking terms and the principle that everyone is equal before the criminal law, that is, organizations can be the subjects of confession-to-justice. The bases for organizations to establish confession-to-justice are discussed in detail soon after by the author from the four aspects: the establishment of confession-to-justice by organizations accords with the legislative intention to establish the system of confession-to-justice, the establishment of confession-to-justice by organizations has legal grounds, organizations have the subjective qualification to establish confession-to-justice, organizations can make out the expressed intention of confession-to-justice, carrying out the activities of establishing confession-to-justice and having the necessity of establishing confession-to-justice, and realistic meanings of establishing confession-to-justice by organizations are explained clearly from the view of practice.Constitutive requirements of establishing confession-to-justice by organizations are mainly discussed in part two of this paper. Constitutive requirements of establishing confession-to-justice by organizations are also the conditions of affirming the establishment of confession-to-justice by organizations. Various kinds of theories and doctrines are introduced, evaluated and analyzed first by the author. The author thinks that the establishment of confession-to-justice by organizations should have four aspects conditions after affirmative doctrine and negative doctrine are integrated. First, it must be voluntarily surrendered to justice by the criminal organizations. That is, the legal representatives, person in charge or directly responsible supervisors who are belong to the criminal organizations and are capable to stand for criminal organizations to surrender themselves to justice or other responsible personnel who are authorized and entrusted by the decision-making body or decision makers of the criminal organizations surrender themselves to the officials who have the power to investigate and take care of crimes besides victims, blasted organizations and personnel related to the crimes after committing crimes and before adopted enforcement measures, that is voluntarily surrendering to justice. Next, the whole will of the organizations should be reflected by the behaviors of confession-to-justice, it also is the key to affirm confession-to-justice by organizations. The two aspects of the formative manners of organizational will and the reflection of organizational will are discussed by the author with respect to how to affirm whether the behaviors of confession-to-justice reflects the whole will of the organizations or not. Once again, intention of confession-to-justice by organizations and carrying out the behaviors of confession-to-justice in the name of the organizations are two aspects that are the unity of the subjective and objective and indispensable to establish confession-to-justice by organizations. After the intention of confession-to-justice is formed by the criminal organizations, confession-to-justice is carried out to depend on natural person, the natural person who confesses to justice must carry out in the name of the organizations, or confession-to-justice by organizations shouldn't be established although the natural person are entrusted by the organizations which have the intention to confess to justice. Finally, the crime should be made a statement according to the facts by the organizations after surrendering to justice. In practice, principal criminal facts by which the nature of the crimes committed by organizations and the criminal plots can be made sure should be made a statement according to the facts stated by the legal representatives, person in charge or directly responsible supervisors who are belong to the criminal organizations and have taken part in the crimes committed by organizations, or after voluntarily surrendered to justice by other responsible personnel who are authorized and entrusted by the decision-making body or decision makers of the criminal organizations, the criminal facts that are carried out by the above personnel and other known personnel are included into the criminal facts here, so it can be affirmed as making a statement about the crimes committed by organizations according to the facts.Several special problems directed towards affirming confession-to-justice by organizations are discussed by the author in part three of this paper. First, although the criminal organizations themselves aren't be imposed of penalty under the accusation of single punishment, it still comes down to whether the whole effectiveness of confession-to-justice by organizations are governed by the members of natural person or not, therefore, under the circumstance that organizations offend the accusation of single punishment but are sacred from punishments by penalty, it should be recognized that organizations have the possibilities to confess to justice. Second, natural person who stand for organizations to confess to justice but run away or withdraw the confession after confessing to justice, if natural person who stand for organizations to confess to justice are the legal representatives, person in charge and directly responsible supervisor, due to the organizational will can be reflected by the individual will of these person and their activities are carried out in stand of the organizations, the activities of running away should be regarded as the activities of organizations and the establishment of confession-to-justice by criminal organizations shouldn't be affirmed. If natural person who stand for organizations to confess to justice are the other personnel authorized and entrusted to surrender to justice by the organizations, their activities can't reflect the will of organizations, so the continuous affirmation of confession-to-justice by organizations shouldn't affected. Third, the organizations which are adopted enforcement measures or are serving prison sentences make a statement according to the facts about other crimes, which are belong to the organizations but haven't grasped by judicial authorities, it should be regarded as the confession-to-justice by organizations. It should be affirmed as confession-to-justice by organizations if the stated crimes committed by organizations and the crimes grasped and sentenced by judicial authorities don't belong to the same kind of crimes; to the contrary, it shouldn't be affirmed as confession-to-justice by organizations if the stated crimes committed by organizations and the crimes grasped and sentenced by judicial authorities belong to the same kind of crimes. Fourth, the affirmation of multiple crimes committed by organizations should accord with the confession-to-justice principles under the circumstance that multiple crimes have been committed by natural person, that is, the crimes which have been confessed to justice should be treated as the confession-to-justice by organizations but other crimes which haven't been confessed to justice shouldn't be governed by their effectiveness when multiple crimes have been committed by the criminal organizations. Fifth, interrelated personnel who stand for the organizations to surrender to justice should make a statement according to the facts about other organizations or natural person that have taken part in the joint crimes besides that it is made a statement according to the facts about criminal facts of their own organizations if the organizations confessing to justice are accessorial in the joint crimes committed by organizations; if the organizations confessing to justice are in the place of principal offenders in the joint crimes, interrelated personnel who are capable to stand for criminal organizations to surrender to justice should make a statement according to the facts about the known and joint criminal facts of other organizations and natural person who have taken part in the joint crimes, and then it can be affirmed as confession-to-justice by organizations.Some problems in the current punishments and legislative system about the confession-to-justice by organizations in this country are discussed and analyzed in the last part of paper. Therewith, relevant regulations in foreign countries about the confession-to-justice by organizations are put forward to be used as a source for reference by the author when law is made, penalty of qualifications and penalty of reputations about the confession-to-justice by organizations should be increased in the criminal law in this country. The punishment system for punishing the crimes committed by organizations should be perfected through increasing penal means to the crimes committed by organizations and the diversifications of the punishments to organizations should be achieved, so that confession-to-justice and failing to confess to justice after the crimes committed by the organizations are very different in the aspect of punishments.