The Application Of The Principle Of Suiting Penalty To Fault In The Law Of Administrative Punishment Over Security

The Administrative Penalty Law revised in 2021 has refined the principle of excessive punishment from three dimensions: "excessive","punishment",and"equivalent".It mentions that the establishment and implementation of administrative penalties must be based on facts,which are equivalent to the facts,nature,circumstances,and degree of social harm of illegal acts.Promoted the development of the theory of the principle of equivalent punishment.Although the law does not directly use the term "equivalent punishment principle",this principle has been widely applied by administrative and judicial organs.The Law on Public Security Management Punishments and the Administrative Punishments Law are in line with the principles of punishment.Article 5,Paragraph 1 stipulates that "Public security management penalties must be based on facts and be equivalent to the nature,circumstances,and degree of social harm of violations of public security management.It has been more than 10 years since the amendment of the Public Security Management Punishment Law in 2012,and many normative contents are disconnected from the development of the times.In terms of implementing the principle of excessive punishment,the Law on Public Security Management Punishments has problems of abstract legal provisions,lack of a system of discretionary norms,and insufficient connection with other laws and regulations.In actual law enforcement,there may be problems such as insufficient judgment standards for illegal acts,arbitrary application of punishment types,and vague recognition of subjective rules,which can lead to improper punishment.In recent years,although the Public Security Management Punishment Law itself has not been revised,the principle of excessive punishment has also been further developed through other means.Firstly,various public security departments have introduced discretionary standards for public security management penalties,such as the "Common Administrative Penalty Discretionary Standards for Public Security Organs in Shanxi Province" and the "Discretionary Standards for Public Security Management Penalties in Hebei Province".By combining interpretive normative content and discretionary normative content,it plays an important role in constraining the administrative discretion of public security organs.Secondly,the Regulations on the Procedures for Handling Administrative Cases by Public Security Organs are of great significance in regulating the application of punishment procedures by law enforcement personnel and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of citizens,legal persons,and other organizations.Whether the punishment procedure is strictly followed has a significant impact on achieving excessive punishment.Therefore,the rapid case handling procedure not only improves law enforcement efficiency but also sets strict usage conditions to prevent abuse of power.Finally,in situations such as public health emergencies,the exercise of police powers cannot be separated from the constraints of the Public Security Management Punishment Law.In summary,legal documents are constantly filling the loopholes and drawbacks of the Public Security Management Punishment Law,but there are still many problems with the principle of excessive punishment,not only due to outdated legislation,but also due to judicial neglect.In the judgments on cases of public security management penalties,the majority of cases use "obvious impropriety" as the argumentation content.Many judicial documents reflect the principle of excessive punishment in substantive content,but do not clearly explain the principle of excessive punishment.This may be due to some concerns about the refinement of the principle,or it may be believed that the principle does not need to be mentioned.The construction of the principle system of excessive punishment equivalent in the Public Security Management Punishment Law should be problem-oriented and correspondingly improved.In response to the issue of low practicality of the principle of excessive punishment,the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress should actively set standards for the discretion of public security management penalties,while also paying attention to flexibility and flexibility to prevent the low quality of justice from causing law enforcement personnel to feel constrained,and even hindering the realization of excessive punishment.In response to the issue of unclear criteria for determining "equivalence",the Public Security Management Penalty Law can attempt to categorize discretionary factors and prevent illegal behavior from occurring or punish the consequences of illegal behavior from a punishment perspective.In response to the lack of a systematic theory of excessive punishment equivalence,the status and role of each principle can be clarified by clarifying the relationship between the principle of excessive punishment equivalence and other basic principles of administrative law.The further development of the principle of excessive punishment in the Public Security Management Punishment Law involves three aspects.Firstly,due to the lack of a criterion for "equivalence" in the principle of excessive punishment,public security organs can use the principle of proportionality as an auxiliary means or analytical tool.Secondly,as the Administrative Penalty Law has made significant modifications to excessive punishment,the Public Security Management Penalty Law should also actively absorb and draw lessons from it,including non punishment for first violation,subjective fault judgment,and other aspects,while clarifying the relationship with the application of the Criminal Law.