Research On The Crime Of Disrupting Public Service

In a historic transforming period of China, the combination of social contradiction and interests demand leads to difficult of Social management and the increasing of the crime of disrupting public service, in which violence is becoming more frequently and known to public. Due to this, to some extent credibility of the government and administrative efficiency is undermined. Even in some cases, personal injury, huge loss property is occurred. The incentives of the crime of disrupting public service include internal factors and external factors. Intrinsic factor stems from the national management of public order requiring proper restrictions on citizens’personal freedom results in the conflict among interest of the State, society and the perpetrator. External factors stems from the gap between national staffs’ methods、attitude of law enforcement and expecting, philosophy of administrative counterpart.Article277of Criminal Law provides for the crime of disrupting public service, that is a person who by means of force or threat, obstructs a public servant of a state organ to perform his duty according to law, a representative of the National People’s Congress or a local people’s congress at any level to perform his duty related to the representative according to law, a person of the Red Cross to perform his duty according to law during a natural disaster or unexpected incident, or obstruct a state security organ or a public security organ to carry out the tasks of state security without resorting to force or threat,if a serious result is caused. However, Article 277did not give a specific definition on the degree of violence and level of threats. Due to this, it can’t catch up with the needs of complicated social life, as to reduce efficiency of judicial practice and the unity of legal system. Research on the crime of disrupting public service is the need of criminal jurisprudence theory and practice.The article is divided into three parts. The first part discusses the concept, nature, and the reason of the crime of disrupting public service. In addition, these parts give a brief introduction and comparison of the development of it in most of the countries.The second part is the main part of the article; the author discusses the four aspects of the crime. The subject of the crime is any person who is beyond16years and has ability to response for a crime. The subjective aspect of crime is intention; strictly speaking, the preceding three paragraphs of Article277needs abstract danger intention, the last one needs actual harmful intention. The object of crime is government officials, the Red Cross staff, NPC deputy and material ensuring the personnel to perform his duty, on this basis the paper defines the scope of governmental officials. In addition this part defines the nature of violence, threat, and gives a criterion for appropriate time to perform public administration.The third part discusses on the morphology and crime number of the crime. There is no crime of attempt or desistance in the preceding three paragraphs of Article277, but there is unaccomplished crime in the fourth paragraph. Research on the number of the crime of disrupting public service is one of the important contents in this paper. It has important practical significance in judicial practice, as for the research on the implicated relation, imaginative joinder of offenses, and cumulative punishment to the crime of disrupting public service is involved. Moreover, the article tells us the differences among the crime of disrupting public service, resisting taxes and refusing to execute judgments or orders.