Study On The Fault Forms Of The Crime Of Impairing The Prevention And Treatment Of Infectious Diseases

As one of the powerful weapons in the field of criminal law to deal with sudden public health and safety incidents,crime of obstructing the prevention and control of infectious diseases has long been dormant and less discussed in the academic community since its establishment.With the outbreak of the COVID-19 in 2020,it entered the public view and was brought to the attention of legislators and the judiciary.Amendment(XI)to the Criminal Law has improved the offence of the crime,but its form of guilt is still in a vague state.The form of guilt is related to the distinction between crime and non-crime,the distinction between this crime and the other crime,and the distinction between the severity of punishment.Clarifying the form of guilt for the crime will help guide the judiciary in the correct conviction and sentence,and help build a strict public health safety protection network.In Chinese criminal law circles,there are three main views on the study:negligence,intent and compound.The reason for this theoretical dispute mainly contains two aspects: Firstly,the provisions of the criminal law is vague and unclear.The crime is located in Article 330 of the Criminal Law,which lacks the direct expression of the form of guilt as "intentional" or "negligence",and this provision directly leads to the form of guilt of this crime in a vague state.Secondly,the criteria for determining the form of guilt are different.There are mainly three views of the form of guilt: the standard of result,the standard of conduct and the dual standard of conduct and result.Therefore,to clarify the form of guilt for the crime,it is necessary to clarify and unify the criteria for determining the form of guilt.In this regard,the criteria for determining the form of guilt should be adhered to: the standard of result is derived from the provisions of the law and can fully reflect the subjective mental attitude of the perpetrator.Both the view of intent and the view of compound have defects,the view of intent focuses on the actor to violate the Administrative regulations,making the crime become the conduct crime,confusing the intentional and general behavior of the intentional,confusing the act of intentional and intentional results,did not adhere to the results of the standard form of guilt judgment standards.The view of compound contrary to the principle of statutory crime and punishment,erased the principle of adaptation of crime and punishment implied in the evaluation of the personal danger of the perpetrator,can not give the perpetrator the statutory penalty in line with his subjective evil,can not reflect the principle of differentiation,light and heavy punishment.Compared to the intentional and compounding theory,the view of negligence is the optimal solution in the context of our criminal law.On the positive side,the view of negligence follows the result standard theory,the actor’s behavior motivation determines that he does not hold the attitude of actively pursuing or indulging in the occurrence of harmful results;it is in line with the basic principles of criminal law,and its establishment has the substantive reasons in line with the literary interpretation.On the other hand,the controversial points of the current theoretical community attacking the view of negligence do not affect its establishment,the negligent dangerous crime has space for application,it will not unduly expand the crime circle,will not affect the identification of common crimes.