Defects And Reconstruction On Article306of The Criminal Law

Article306of the Criminal Law define the defender and law agent asthe special subject of constituting a crime evokes a lot of disagreements indomestic legal profession and legal sector. The legislation of the legislatureis justifiable; however it causes a lot of disadvantage consequences injudicial practice. The difference between the purpose of legislation and thejudicial practice make us to reconsider the necessity of this Article existingindependently and the inadequacies.The thesis is divided into three parts. The first part is mainly focus onanalyzing the constitutive elements of this crime and the judgment ofaccomplished status. The destruction of evidence or withholding evidence,false evidence does not include the creating evidence; actor’s threatening,the person of temptation is the witness, does not include the appraiser andvictim. The standard of accomplished status of this crime is the lawyerfinish the act of giving the forging evidence to the judicial organizations.The second part, from aspects of legislative ideas, the legislativetechniques and judicial practice, analyzes and points out the inadequaciesof Article306of the Criminal Law. From the view of legislative ideas, tocondemn the same crime with different condemn with improper andillegitimate reasons violates the principle of equality of Criminal Law; from the view of legislative techniques, violates the explicitness of Criminal Law;from the view of legislative techniques, it increases the risk of criminaladvocacy and causes negative effects to develop the system of criminaladvocacy in our country, and this circumstance are not propitious forfurther development of the Law.The third part, from the angle of improving the substantive law andestablishing procedure security to investigate the criminal responsibility oflawyer, proposes to reconstruct Article306of the Criminal Law. Onsubstantive law, it is very necessary to integrate Article306and Article307of the Criminal Law and set up the provision of initiative repentance. Onprocedure security, the case of lawyer’s perjury should implement theexemption system and supervise by judicial organizations in differentplaces. Meanwhile, the criminal responsibility of lawyer’s perjury shall beinvestigated after the final judgment of the case.