| Since the "Criminal Law Amendment(9)" was promulgated,there has been no relevant judicial interpretation for the crime of fabricating and deliberately disseminating false information.This leads to different standards for determining "seriously disrupting social order" in the crime of fabricating and deliberately disseminating false information in judicial practice.Specifically,there are three main views on the "social order" in the crime of fabricating and deliberately disseminating false information: first,public order based on reality;second,public security;third,cyberspace order.This article sets up the status quo,and attempts to clarify the criteria for "seriously disrupting social order" in the crime of fabricating and deliberately disseminating false information from both qualitative and quantitative perspectives.The core point of this article is that to characterize the "social order" of this crime,the provisions of Article 2 of the "Supreme People’s Court on Several Interpretations of the Applicable Law for the Trial of Criminal Cases of Fabricating and Intentionally Dissemination of False Terrorism" shall be referred to,and the crime shall be determined.The "social order" should be an order based on reality,and the specific definition should also be based on the "Interpretation." At the same time,from the point of view of legal interest,to clarify the point of view,public security and cyberspace order should not be understood as the "social order" in the crime of fabricating and deliberately disseminating false information.In terms of quantification,this article’s point of view is: judging whether to cause a serious disturbance to the social order needs to adhere to the following three principles: First,the social order "cannot operate normally" as the standard.Second,adhere to the identification standards based on reality.Third,the breadth of information dissemination should be used as a supplementary standard. |
PDF Full Text Request