Research On The Identification Of Dereliction Of Duty Among Community Correction Staff

Since the Implementation Measures of the Community Correction Law of the People’s Republic of China jointly formulated by the "Two High Authorities" and the"Two High Authorities" in 2012,the number of cases of community correction staff being punished for re-committing crimes by community correction objects has increased.After searching and analyzing the judgment documents,it is found that the judicial organs have a certain tendency of results-oriented when making judgments.The factor that community correctional object commits crime again is considered more.In the judicial practice of community correction,there are some problems such as unclear definition of direct responsibility and indirect responsibility,unclear definition of harmful behavior of crime of dereliction of duty,unclear definition of material loss and non-material loss,confused identification of causal relationship between the behavior of community correction staff and harmful results,and unclear definition of subjective state of guilt.In view of the objective conditions of the working environment of community correction staff,fewer staff,more community correction objects and insufficient knowledge of correction law,it is necessary to accurately identify the crime of dereliction of duty of community correction staff and maintain the modesty of criminal law.Therefore,in view of the problems found in the analysis of judicial documents,combined with the relevant theories of dereliction of duty and causality,it is identified from the criminal subject,the omission of community correction staff,the material loss and non-material loss,the judgment of causality and the judgment of subjective guilt state.In terms of the subject of the crime of dereliction of duty,when identifying the crime of dereliction of duty of different criminal subjects,the direct responsible personnel and indirect responsible personnel of community correction work should be distinguished.Attention should be paid to the responsibility distribution of the superior and subordinate relationship between the judicial bureau and the judicial office,and the responsibilities of the community correction staff should be taken into account,so as to achieve the compatibility of crime,responsibility and punishment.In terms of the omission of community correction staff,the capacity of community correction staff to act is judged to distinguish the dereliction of duty from the general work failure,and the state of obligation conflict is judged at the same time.The general work failure has no infringement of legal interests and does not need punishment,so it should not be identified as the crime of dereliction of duty.The consequences of reoffending should be measured from two aspects:material loss and non-material loss.For material loss,conviction and sentencing should be carried out according to the standards of personal damage and economic loss.For non-material loss,comprehensive judgment should be made by combining the crime of re-offending and the social impact caused by the object of community correction.At the level of causality,fact causality judgment and result attribution judgment are adopted.At the level of fact causality,whether there is an empirical relationship between the behavior of community correction staff and the result of re-offending of community correction objects is judged.At the level of result attribution,blame judgment is made from the aspects of the reality of community correction staffs behavior risk,causality,and sufficient correlation with community correction objects.In terms of subjective guilt status identification,the new fault theory is adopted,based on the judgment of community correction staffs duty of care and prediction possibility,and then the judgment of outcome avoidance possibility is carried out.