The Demarcation Between Crime And Non-crime Of Extortion In Exercise Of Rights

When citizens’ rights and interests are damaged,they will actively take certain actions to safeguard their rights.Improper exercise of rights may violate the crime of extortion,thus blurring the boundary between crime and non-crime.Modern society advocates that there are many ways to solve conflicts,and the active negotiation between the two parties is a negotiation process,which is the expression of the free will of both parties.This process is allowed by law,rather than the result of blackmail.The principle of autonomy of will cannot deny the legitimacy and legitimacy of the negotiation process,even if the amount of the final claim exceeds the expectation of the public.When the rights defenders in the premise of no rights protection basis,take threats or blackmail means of behavior,in order to illegal possession for the purpose of obtaining a large amount of property or multiple extortion,should be identified as the crime of extortion.This requires that,when dividing the crime of extortion and non-crime in the exercise of rights,we should first pay attention to whether the rights defenders have the basis of rights protection,that is,whether they have the fact of rights damage.Under the premise of the fact that there is damage,there is the saying of safeguarding rights;If the lack of damaged facts,it is difficult to prove that the rights defenders have the legitimate purpose of maintaining rights,but will show that it has the purpose of illegal possession,then it may constitute the crime of extortion.Secondly,it is necessary to analyze whether the means taken by rights defenders are acts of threat or blackmail in the crime of extortion.When the rights defenders threaten to expose to the media,claiming to expose the damaged facts to the media for compensation is not a threat or blackmail in the crime of extortion,it should be regarded as the rights defenders’ negotiation strategy;But a claim that there is no correlation between the facts disclosed to the media and the damaged rights can amount to racketeering.And when the rights defenders threaten to expose the other party’s illegal and criminal behavior to claim for compensation,if the other party’s illegal and criminal behavior is the same as the rights and interests of the rights defenders,then it has legitimacy,not only maintain their own rights but also expose the illegal and criminal behavior of others,which is also actively encouraged by the state.If the illegal and criminal behavior of the other party is not the same as the damaged rights and interests of the rights holder,they lack relevance and may constitute the crime of extortion.The fact that power was exercised as a threat or extortion is relevant to the determination of the crime of extortion and the improper exercise of power does not affect the composition of other crimes.Finally,it must be noted that the amount of the claim cannot be used as a criterion for the criminality and non-criminality of racketeering in the exercise of demarcation rights.In determining the offence of extortion,high claims cannot be treated as extortion because the right holder has the purpose of unlawful possession,but should be further considered whether the high claim is agreed by both parties,whether it is accompanied by threats or threats.