Criminal Accountability Of Collective Research Type Malfeasance Crimes In Criminal Trials

In criminal trials,collective research-oriented dereliction of duty crimes,as a criminal phenomenon,are common in judicial practice and can easily lead to the occurrence of unjust,false,and erroneous cases,affecting judicial fairness.The behavior of this type of crime is relatively covert,and individuals often use collective research as a legitimate appearance to conceal the essence of their crimes.Therefore,in practice,it is difficult to hold individuals criminally responsible.Given the illegal consequences brought about by such crimes and the difficulties in determining criminal responsibility in practice,regulating the criminal accountability of collective research-oriented dereliction of duty in criminal trials has become a very important and practical topic.The author intends to conduct research with a problem oriented approach along the following lines.Differentiate and analyze the concepts of criminal trial,collective research,and dereliction of duty in collective research dereliction of duty crimes in criminal trials,in order to define the concept of collective research dereliction of duty crimes in criminal trials.Classify the organizations that apply collective research in criminal trials based on the number of opinion decision-makers,such as the opinions of the collegial panel within the court,the opinions of the criminal trial committee,and the opinions of the criminal trial professional committee;The scope of collective research is defined by the opinions of the judicial committee led by the external three leaders’meeting,the joint meeting,and the professional committee led by the superior court.Divide the types of behavior of participants based on the attitudes of voters,and evaluate the current situation of criminal liability based on specific cases in practice.Summarize the problems and difficulties in criminal liability in practice.It mainly includes four aspects:firstly,the basis for attribution is lacking,that is,the relevant laws and regulations are not perfect enough;The second issue is the endogeneity of collective research,which refers to the inherent drawbacks of collective research leading to blame;The third is the adverse effects of external factors;The fourth issue is the determination of damage consequences and causal relationships.The first three issues can be solved by improving relevant laws and regulations,regulating the scope of collective research,and strengthening professional training for judges.The identification of causal relationships is the key issue that needs to be addressed in this article.The main reason for the problems in determining causal relationships in analysis is that traditional causal relationship theory lacks recognition of causal relationships,places too much emphasis on factual attribution,and lacks the accountability of results.Therefore,the author intends to use the objective attribution theory as a guide to test the attribution through three rules:the risk not allowed by the manufacturing law,the realization of the risk,and the validity scope not exceeding the constituent elements.Then,by comparing and analyzing the specific situations in the case,the operational mechanism of normative attribution in judicial practice is intuitively demonstrated,providing ideas for the causal relationship judgment of collective research-based dereliction of duty crimes.Finally,from the perspective of voters,specific improvement paths for individual criminal accountability in collective research-oriented dereliction of duty crimes are proposed.