Distinctionism:Advocacy For A New Principle Of Attribution Of Results To Accomplices

Articles 25-29 of China’s criminal law do not stipulate the concepts of principal offender,indirect principal offender,joint principal offender and narrow accomplice.It holds that China’s joint crime system is a distinction system between principal offender and accomplice,which lacks formal legitimacy.There are significant differences between the punishment principle of accomplice in China’s joint crime system and the formal single principal offender system.The view that China’s joint crime participation system is a formal single principal offender system lacks substantive legitimacy.In contrast,china’s joint crime system is a system of principal and accomplice with Chinese characteristics.The theory of joint crime aims to solve the problem of conviction and sentencing of criminal participants.Similarly,the concept of principal offender and accessory offender should also solve the problem.In the field of consequential crimes,conviction is not only about which crime is convicted,but also the special form of crime of each participant.Then,the judgment of the attribution of the result of the infringement of legal interests should be based on it.What’s more,traditional scholars believe that the principle of attribution of results to accomplices is the principle of joint attribution;scholars of the unitary system believe that the principle of attribution of results to accomplices is the principle of individual attribution;scholars of the distinction system believe that the principle of attribution of results to accomplices is the principle of subordination.However,these three viewpoints have great defects.Article 27 of China’s criminal law divides accomplices into secondary accomplices and auxiliary accomplices.The former is the accomplice of behavior sharing,and the latter is the accomplice of result plus merit.On one hand,for the implementation of behavioral accomplice,the principle of common attribution of results should be applied,that is,each criminal participant should be regarded as a whole and jointly judge the attribution of results according to the illegal elements of the whole.On the other hand,the principle of separate attribution of results should be applied to the result plus merit accomplice,that is,this kind of joint offender should be regarded as a separate individual,and whether the result of infringement of legal interests can be attributed to the perpetrator should be judged separately through the theory of promotion of legal interests,which is the basic connotation of the principle of attribution of results to accomplices.The result belongs to the principle of distinguishing accomplices,which is based on the law of causality and the partial reaction of the law of freedom to the law of causality;The jurisprudential basis is the "typical conformity" and "atypical conformity" of the overall behavior and constituent elements;The legal norms are based on the punishment principle of accessory offenders in article 27 of the criminal law and other provisions of judicial interpretation.Establishing the distinction principle of "attribution of results" to accomplices is conducive to determining the attribution of results of accomplices,determining the special forms of crimes of accomplices,defining the scope of punishment for accomplices,and further judging the statutory penalty range of accomplices.Therefore,the provisions of Article 27 of the Criminal Law that the accomplice should be given a lighter,reduced or exempted punishment shall be applied.It provides a theoretical scheme for establishing a localized common criminal responsibility system.