Research In Be Handled Only Upon Complaint

When a woman in Hangzhou Gu went downstairs to pick up the express,she was fabricated as an derailed express brother,which caused an uproar on the Internet.Gu filed a criminal private prosecution against the perpetrator of malicious slander in accordance with the law,and public opinion further fermented.The Supreme People’s Procuratorate believed that the perpetrator of online slander randomly pointed to unspecified objects in life,so that every citizen may be infringed by his slander,and determined that his slander seriously endangered social order,so as to determine that the case should be filed for criminal prosecution,so as to enter the public prosecution procedure.The case from private prosecution to public prosecution has aroused heated debate among scholars again,but the significance of turning private prosecution to public prosecution in Hangzhou libel case lies not only in the proper handling of the case procedure,but also in the fact that we can seriously reflect on the prosecution theory of telling to deal with the crime in our country.China adopts the absolute private prosecution doctrine for the criminal prosecution of telling only to deal with the crime.The right to tell can only be realized by filing a criminal private prosecution to the court.There is a problem that "telling only to deal with" is misunderstood as "private prosecution only to deal with".In addition,at present,the operation of China’s private prosecution system is limited by the insufficient ability of the parties to provide evidence.From the perspective of network insult and slander cases,there are high thresholds for filing private prosecution cases,evidence collection of private prosecutors There are obstacles to proof,problems in applying for evidence and inherent defects in the prosecution mode of criminal cases.Therefore,by comparing the prosecution mode between China and other countries and regions,this paper analyzes the inheritance of China’s complaint handling system,absorbs the reasonable core of the "complaint is theory" system,redefines "complaint",improves the prosecution of China’s complaint handling system,and establishes a more reasonable and more in line with the original intention of legislation in combination with China’s national conditions.This paper consists of five chapters.The first chapter starts from the Hangzhou libel case,first combs the case of Hangzhou libel case,and discusses the role of public opinion in turning the case from private prosecution case to public prosecution case.Secondly,it analyzes the general rule significance of the transfer of private prosecution to public prosecution in Hangzhou libel case,which has a certain guiding significance.Then,from the perspective of sociology,this paper analyzes the occurrence of defamation in Hangzhou,the insufficient protection of women’s rights and interests and the defects of the judicial system,and reflects on the relevant systems.The system setting to protect the victim’s willingness to tell has become an obstacle for the victim to prosecute the crime.The second chapter introduces China’s system of handling complaints only.China’s system of handling complaints only has been misunderstood as "private prosecution only".The first section of this chapter discusses and reflects on the historical development and meaning of the treatment only after telling,and comes to the conclusion that the lack of procedural relief rights makes the victims of relevant crimes unable to get effective relief,but the criminals can go unpunished.The second section analyzes the purpose and significance of telling before processing.Next,it analyzes the legislation related to the crime of private prosecution in China and why we choose the crime of online insult and defamation as the perspective.The third chapter discusses the realistic focus of telling only to deal with cases from the perspective of network insult and defamation,and analyzes many procedural problems encountered in the operation of personal accusation and the protection of the rights of victims of network insult and defamation.The fourth chapter compares and analyzes the prosecution modes of other countries and regions through the study of comparative law,as well as the comparative analysis represented by the crime of defamation,so as to get enlightenment and provide useful experience for the relevant systems of our country.The fifth chapter makes a preliminary construction of the complaint only handling system from the perspective of network insult and slander,and puts forward corresponding suggestions on the basis of the above problems.First,redefine the "tell" in the tell only system,which is no longer limited to bringing a private prosecution to the court,but gives the tell only the right to deal with the criminal victim,so that he can tell to the special organ after suffering from the relevant criminal acts,and the special organ will collect evidence and leave it to the victim to decide whether to bring a criminal private prosecution.Second,because the operation effect of private prosecution is very low due to the high filing conditions of private prosecution,it is suggested to reduce the threshold of filing conditions of private prosecution,learn civil litigation,and change private prosecution cases from the de facto "case review system" to "case registration system".Whether they constitute a crime can be determined through specific trial activities.Third,in view of the frequent online slander and online insult,establish a preventive mechanism in advance,and strengthen the audit before the release of information and photos suspected of personal privacy,so as to fundamentally reduce the occurrence of such cases.Fourth,it is the development after the redefinition of "telling before handling",that is,it is necessary to determine the judicial organ that accepts the victim to realize the telling,clarify its auxiliary responsibility and degree of evidence collection,and do not change the nature of the case and lend a helping hand to the victim when the ability of the private prosecutor to initiate private prosecution is obviously low.