On Judicial Determination Of The Intermediation In Bribery

Before China promulgate the first Criminal Code, the intermediation in bribery was oneact of the corruption until the Criminal Code promulgated in1979and the intermediation inbribery became a separate accusation. However, it was controversial among the theoreticalcircles and the judicial pratice circles since this behavior became a separate accusation. Andthere is confusion in the judicial practice mainly about the meaning of the intermediation inbribery and the difference between this behavior with the mediacy act, the mediatingbribe-taking and the crime of accepting bribe by influence. About these problems, the authorintend to talk about my own views in this paper so as to be able to correctly identify and dealwith the relevant cases. This paper mainly study the intermediation in bribery from threeaspects.The first part is an overview of the intermediation in bribery. In this part, firstly it is theintroduction to the definition of the intermediation in bribery in China and then it is theintroduction to the rules of the definition of the intermediation which legislated by Chineselegislature and Chinese judicial branch. And finally the author introduce the foreign rules ofthe definition of the intermediation.The second part is an analysis of the meaning of “the intermediation in bribery”. Firstlyit is the introduction to the interpretation of the meaning of “the intermediation in bribery”issued by the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and then it’s the introduction to the theoreticalcircles’ different interpretation of this interpretation, and meanwhile to show the judicialofficers’ different understandings of the judicial interpretation issued by the Supreme People’sProcuratorate based on two released actual cases. And finally the author intend to bringforward opinion on account of the theory of accomplice and the principle of criminalresponsibility that the intermedia-tion in bribery includes only information transfer, recommendation and making a matchbetween bribery and corruption in order to achieve bribery successfully after the briber orbribee have a mens rea. It excludes giving counsel suggest or looking for bribery object forbriber or bribee, so does the execution of offering bribes or accepting bribes, such as turningover or collecting bribery.The third part is an analysis of the difference between the intermediation in bribery with the confused acts or crimes. Firstly it is a statement of differences between the intermediationin bribery with the mediacy act. And the differences lie in such aspects as incidence, objectand content of introduction, behavioral nature, actor’s subjective purpose and relation betweenboth being introduced. The differencesbetween the intermediation in bribery with the mediating bribe-taking lie in such aspects asthe subject, the content of the objective behaviors,the subject of the action object and whetherthe actor take the bribery, especially the relationship between the mediator with the membersof state administration who handle affairs is a relationship of power trading in the laterbehavior, and this crime haven’t such relation. The differences between the intermediation inbribery with the crime of accepting bribe by influence lie in such aspects as the subject,theaction counterpart,the objective behavior,the motivation and purpose and the conditions ofconstituting a crime.