Criminal law regulation of criminal acts involving COVID-19 epidemic

Article 277 of the CL Article 277:

Whoever by means of violence or threat, obstructs a functionary of a State organ from carrying out his functions according to a low shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, or public surveillance or be fined.

Whoever, by violence or threat, obstructs a deputy to the National People's Congress or a local people's congress at any level from performing his deputy's functions according to law shall be punished in accor-dance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

Whoever during natural calamities or emergencies obstructs, by means of violence or threat, the work-ers of the Red Cross Society from performing their functions and duties according to law shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the first paragraph.

Whoever intentionally obstructs officers of a State security organ or a public security organ from maintaining State security in accordance with law and causes serious consequences, though without resort to violence or threat, shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the first paragraph. stipulates that the object of this crime is the staff of state organs, specifically including staff of state organs, representatives of the National People's Congress and local people's congresses at various levels, staff of the Red Cross, staff of state security organs and public security organs, etc. Article 93 of the CL stipulates that “State functionaries referred to in this Law refer to those who are engaged in official duties in state organs. Personnel engaged in official duties in state-owned companies, enterprises, institutions and people's organizations, and personnel appointed by state organs, state-owned companies, enterprises and institutions to engage in official duties in non-state-owned companies, enterprises, institutions and social organizations, as well as other personnel engaged in official duties in accordance with the law”. The presentation of “New Public Service Theory” (Li Xihui 2007, 608) makes the essence of state functionaries clearer, that is, state functionaries are those who have obtained specific qualifications, have specific functions and powers, and are engaged in state management in the name of their duties and have certain responsibilities. During the period of epidemic prevention and control, the essence of public servants is more focused on performing their duties according to law, and the behavior of performing their duties has certain particularity. Acts that interfere with the implementation of measures closely related to epidemic prevention, quarantine, compulsory isolation, isolation treatment, etc, shall be deemed as acts that interfere with public service. The public servants specified in the “Opinions” include civil servants authorized by the state, civil servants entrusted, and those who are involved in epidemic prevention and control without preparation. Therefore, personnel who assist in epidemic prevention and control also belong to the staff of state organs. The staff of village committees, neighborhood committees, or community gates who are also engaged in epidemic prevention and control work according to the authorization or entrusting of higher authorities are also staff members of state organs. However, if they are volunteers who spontaneously organize to maintain epidemic prevention and control work, or if they have implemented epidemic prevention and control measures beyond the entrusted scope despite the authorization of higher authorities, they are not staff members of state organs. At this time, the offender's nuisance behavior does not represent the crime of obstructing official duties, but may constitute the crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles or the crime of willful and malicious injury.

Criminal acts endangering public safety

For the crime endangering public safety, the main crimes involved are employing dangerous means to endanger public security and impairing the prevention and cure of epidemic diseases. The following mainly expounds the judicial determination of the two charges, that is, the difference between the two charges.

Judicial determination of the crime of employing dangerous means to

endanger public security

On February 27, 2020, Jiang Qibo, director of the Research Office of the Supreme People's Court, and Gao Jingfeng, director of the Legal Policy Research Office of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, jointly answered a reporter's question

-- ))). 2020. Accessed Janu-ary 17, 2021. https://www.spp.gov.cn/xwfbh/wsfbt/202002/t20200227_455391.shtml., clearly stating that in practice, the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods should be strictly grasped according to law. Only when the following three situations are met can the crime of employing dangerous means to endanger public security be applied: COVID-19 patients and pathogen carriers who have been diagnosed refuse isolation treatment or leave isolation treatment without authorization before the isolation period expires, and enter public places or public transport, suspected patients in COVID-19 refuse isolation treatment or leave isolation treatment without authorization before the expiration of the isolation period, and enter public places or public transport, resulting in the spread of novel coronavirus, knowing that he has been diagnosed as a COVID-19 patient or a suspected patient, he maliciously spreads the virus to an unspecified majority out of subjective intentions such as revenge against society, with serious consequences and bad circumstances. Under the COVID-19 epidemic, the following points should be grasped in the judicial determination of the crime of employing dangerous means to endanger public security: First, the definition of the subject of crime. Second, identification of confirming patients and suspected patients. Third, the definition of the subjective aspect.

The definition of the subject of crime

The subject of the crime of employing dangerous means to endanger public security is a general subject or a natural person. The Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China does not make other provision on the criminal subject of this crime. Therefore, the criminal subject of this crime needs to be at least 16 years old and a natural person with criminal responsibility, and the unit does not belong to the subject of this crime (Zhang Kai 2020, 9). In the “Opinions”, there are two types of subjects of the crime of employing dangerous means to endanger public security, namely, confirmed patients and suspected patients. For the former, if you want to be guilty, you must have three conditions at the same time: First, it is a confirmed patient. Second, it implemented one of the two behaviors of refusing isolation treatment or leaving isolation treatment without authorization before the expiration of isolation period. Third, it has entered public places or public transport. For the former subject, both dangerous offenders and consequential offenders are punished; For the latter subject, there must be four conditions for conviction: First, “suspected patient”. Second, it implemented one of the two behaviors of refusing isolation treatment or leaving isolation treatment without authorization before the expiration of isolation period. Third, it has entered public places or public transport. Fourthly, the above-mentioned behavior of the actor caused the consequences of the spread in COVID-19. It can also be seen that only the consequential offender is punished for the “suspected patient”.

Identification of confirming and suspected patients

Article 78 of The Law on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases «ÔßÀéÀ¿ÏIJ^^زÀ³èé)). 2004. Accessed March 25, 2021. https://baike.so.com/ doc/5412518-5650655.html. clearly stipulates: “Infectious disease patients and suspected infectious disease patients refer to those who meet the diagnostic criteria for infectious disease patients and suspected infectious disease patients according to The diagnostic criteria for infectious diseases regulated by the Law of the People's Republic of China on Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases «ÔßÀÄÀ¿ÏIJØØØèزÉ^ßIJØØØßØ). 1990. Accessed March 25, 2021. http://www.law-lib.com/law/law_view1.asp?id=6827. issued by the health administrative department under the State Council”. Although there is no clear stipulation of the Opinions on the criteria for diagnosis, professional judgment should be made according to the diagnostic criteria of COVID-19. No one may arbitrarily identify others as “confirmed patients” or “suspected patients” before being diagnosed by a professional doctor.

The definition of subjective aspect

It can be seen from the provision of the Opinions that this crime must be subjectively intentional. In the context of the widespread anti-epidemic of the whole people, every citizen can subjectively realize that the COVID-19 virus is extremely contagious. Whether it is a “confirmed patient” or a “suspected patient”, it can be subjectively determined as intentional if he refuses isolation treatment or leaves isolation treatment without authorization before the isolation period expires and enters public places or public transport. In practice, most of the actors are indirectly intentional and have a laissez-faire attitude towards the spread of viruses. However, if the actor doesn't know whether he is infected with the virus or not, and entering public places causes many people to be infected, the actor can be regarded as negligent because he subjectively has no intention of the occurrence of harmful results or even does not want the occurrence of harmful results. At this time, it does not represent this crime.

Judicial determination of the crime of impairing the prevention and

cure of epidemic diseases

In the judicial determination of the crime of preventing and treating infectious diseases, there are mainly the following controversies: First, the interpretation of the objective element of the crime of impairing the prevention and cure of epidemic diseases, “Class A infectious diseases”. Second, the intentional crime of obstructing the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases and scope of understanding.

Interpretation of “Class A infectious diseases”

The scope of “Class A infectious diseases” is determined in accordance with the Law on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases and the applicable provisions of the State Council. According to Art. 3 of the Law on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases, the class of infectious diseases refers to plague and cholera. It does not include the new coronavirus. Therefore, at the beginning of the outbreak, it was difficult to identify part of the behavior of resisting epidemic prevention and control measures as the crime of hindering the prevention and control of infectious diseases. In order to avoid the injustice of dealing with misdemeanors and even guilty acts, the “Opinions” interpret “Category A infectious diseases” as including Category B infectious diseases that require preventive and control measures with reference to category A infectious diseases. This explanation has solved the problem of identifying most behaviors in judicial practice. On March 1, 2021, Amendments to the Criminal Code of the People's Republic of China No. 11 1990. Accessed March 25, 2021.

http://www.law-lib.com/law/law_view1.asp?id=6827. was formally implemented. The amendment revised the crime of preventing and treating infectious diseases, and changed “causing the spread of Class A infectious diseases or having serious danger of spreading” in the first paragraph to “causing Class A infectious diseases and infectious diseases that have been determined to take measures to prevent and control Class A infectious diseases according to law or have serious danger of spreading”. It is further clarified that infectious diseases such as COVID-19 and other infectious diseases that have been determined by law to take steps to manage Class A infectious diseases belong to the scope of this crime.

Subjective intentional crime and its cognitive scope

The subjective aspect of this crime is also controversial. The main viewpoints are negligence and intention. The negligence theory holds that the actors who refuse to implement the epidemic prevention and control measures are “deliberately” implemented under the control of their own will, but the actors generally hold a negative attitude towards the consequences that cause the spread of infectious diseases or have serious risks of infection. If the actor intentionally causes serious injury or death, or causes heavy losses to public and private property, it is beyond the scope of the crime of preventing and treating infectious diseases, and should be recognized as the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means according to law (Wang Tao 2020, 70). The theory of negligence is also a common theory in the field of criminal law in China, that is, the actor has overconfident negligence or negligent negligence in causing Class A infectious diseases or spreading danger. Intentional theory holds that the actor who constitutes the crime of obstructing the prevention and control of infectious diseases subjectively shows that his violation of the provisions of the Law on Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases will cause the spread of Class A infectious diseases or have serious danger of spreading, and hopes or lets such a result happen. Judging from the behavior of the crime, most perpetrators knowingly committed the crime, and the perpetrators also knew the consequences of their actions. For the above two theories, the author also agrees with the negligence theory. Today, when the anti-epidemic prevention and control work are vigorously publicized, the public should be aware of the spread of COVID-19 virus and the serious consequences caused by the spread, and at least be overconfident in the harmful consequences.

After briefly expounding the controversial issues in the judicial cognizance of the crime of employing dangerous means to endanger public security and the crime of impairing the prevention and cure of epidemic diseases, the author thinks that Sun Mou- mou's behavior in the above case constitutes the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods. First of all, Sun Moumou is suspected to be a “suspected patient” after being diagnosed by a professional doctor, which accords with the main elements of the crime of employing dangerous means to endanger public security subjectively. Sun Moumou should be aware of the harmful consequences caused by his refusal to accept the epidemic prevention measures and returning to Ji-an by bus. Although he is not actively pursuing the direct intention of causing many people to be isolated for observation, he is at least in a psychological state of laissez-faire for the harmful consequences of his behavior, which is indirect intention, and it endangers the safety of the unspecified majority, which conforms to the constitutive requirements of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means.

Conclusions

In the prevention and control of epidemic situation in COVID-19, we should always adhere to restraint and prudent attitude and implement the criminal policy of combining leniency with severity while severely cracking down, which is a reasonable path that our country must adhere to when dealing with epidemic-related crimes in the face of sudden public health incidents.

The policy of combining leniency with strictness is the basic criminal policy of our country, which runs through the whole process of criminal legislation, criminal justice, and criminal execution. In dealing with epidemic crime, we should adhere to the principle of combining leniency with strictness, be strict in general, and promote the effect of epidemic prevention and control. We should correctly grasp the relationship between leniency and strictness. In accordance with the law, we should severely punish the criminal acts that seriously hinder epidemic prevention and control, such as resisting epidemic prevention and control measures, obstructing official duties, provoking troubles, violently injuring doctors, making fake and selling fakes, driving up prices, defrauding, destroying wildlife resources, etc. At the same time, we should give lenient treatment to mild crimes, which is conducive to resolving social contradictions, relieving social tension under the epidemic situation, and reducing confrontation and enhancing social stability (He Huan Mary 2020, 22). “Leniency” and “Strictness” are relative. For more serious criminal suspects, the authorities can also be lenient according to law within tolerable limits. For criminal suspects who do not gain leniency, they must insist on being cruel according to law. Combining leniency with severity is neither blindly strict nor infinitely lenient. For different crimes, the severity of the penalty should be adapted to the criminal behavior carried out by the perpetrator, so as to ensure the realization of the deterrent power of penalty. Ten batches of Typical Cases issued by the Supreme People's Procuratorate not only give full play to the guiding role, but also deter potential epidemic crimes, which shows social fairness and justice and better serves the overall situation of epidemic prevention and control and social and economic development. These ten batches of “Typical Cases” fully reflect the specific application of the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy during the epidemic air defense period, and insist on using strict and lenient means to deal with the epidemic crime.

Adhere to the principle of “strictness” according to law

The unusual nature of the crime determines the unusual nature of criminal policy (Chen Xingliang 2004, 4). Strike hard is regarded as “an extraordinary means of struggle to solve the problem of extraordinary crime” (Xiao Yang 1996, 48). In Guiding Opinions on Handling Criminal Cases during Epidemic Prevention and Control 2020. Accessed March 25, 2021. http://legal.

people.com.cn/n1/2020/0203/c42510-31568183.html., the Supreme People's Procuratorate pointed out that criminal acts that endanger epidemic prevention and control and seriously disrupt social order should be strictly grasped according to law.

The principle of legality

In the face of epidemic-related crimes, first of all, ten batches of “Typical Cases” have strictly implemented the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a given crime, and the implementation of the criminal policy of combining leniency with strictness must be based on the law, so as to realize the legality of leniency and strictness. The timely publication of “Opinions” provides a concrete basis for punishing epidemic prevention and control crimes according to law, so that judicial organs can accurately grasp the boundary between crime and non-crime when dealing with epidemic crimes, strictly distinguish the relationship between this crime and the other crime, prevent one-sided strictness, and expand the targets of attack. For example, before the “Opinions” was issued, violations of epidemic prevention and control measures, such as concealing trips and not wearing masks, caused serious risks to the spread of COVID-19, and most of them were still investigated and punished for crimes of endangering public safety by dangerous methods. Opinions clearly stipulate the subject scope of the crime of employing dangerous means to endanger public security and the crime of impairing the prevention and cure of epidemic diseases, which make the application of these two crimes clearer and clearer.

The principle of adapting crime to punishment

Secondly, these ten batches of “Typical Cases” reflect the basic principle of adapting crime and punishments. Art. 5 of the CL stipulates: “The severity of punishment should be adapted to the crime committed by criminals and the criminal responsibilities they bear”. This is the normative basis for the principle of adapting crime to punishment to assume the role of judicial guidance. Moreover, the principle of adaptation of crime and punishment is the criminal law system with crime and punishment as the core symbol in China, which is enshrined in the basic principle level (Gao Ming Xuan 2019, 19). On the one hand, we should different epidemic-related crimes differently after comprehensively considering the behavior, subjective attitude, harmful consequences, social harmfulness, social impact, and confession and punishment after the crime. On the other hand, “Opinions” also clarified the circumstances of severe punishment. For example, for the first batch, the second batch, and the third batch of “Typical Cases” of crime that hinder social management order, “severely punish the crime of resisting epidemic prevention and control measures according to law”. The legal gist points out that violent attacks on policemen who are performing their duties according to law will be severely punished for crimes of obstructing official duties; as for economic and property crimes, the legal gist of the fourth batch of Typical Cases pointed out that the production and sale of fake and inferior medical equipment are extremely harmful and must be severely punished according to law. The legal gist of the seventh batch of “Typical Cases” points out that those who drive up prices and seek huge profits during the epidemic prevention and control period, which constitutes a crime, shall be given a heavier punishment according to law for the crime of illegal business operation. The legal gist of the fifth batch of “Typical Cases” on the crime of fraud points out that those who swindle property such as disaster relief, medical goods and materials can be severely punished depending on the crime of fraud. Those who use telecommunication networks to defraud the property of the elderly, students in school, or defraud disaster relief, medical materials and other property shall be given heavier punishment as appropriate; for crimes that endanger the resumption of work and production, the criminal acts that hinder the resumption of work and production shall be strictly prosecuted according to law.

Legal procedures

Finally, judicial organs also strictly follow legal procedures when dealing with crimes involving epidemic situation. In the application of coercive measures, if the criminal suspect is a suspected or confirmed patient, in principle, no coercive custodial measures should be taken. First, the original criminal suspect should be treated with medical treatment and then properly handled according to law. For example, Wei Moumou in Laibin City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region was suspected of obstructing the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases, and Li Moumou in Jinshan District, Shanghai was suspected of obstructing the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases. The suspects were not given compulsory measures for detention. After the periods of recovery or isolation expired, they were punished depending on the law. In terms of procedure, we should strictly protect the basic rights of criminal suspects, strictly abide by the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law on quick adjudication, summary, ordinary procedures, delivery, notification and other deadlines, minimize the impact of epidemic prevention and control on the efficiency of handling cases, and realize the unity of combating crime and protecting human rights.

Adhere to the principle of “lenient punishment” according to law

The lenient punishment according to law means that the criminal suspects and defendants who commit minor crimes or have lenient circumstances are treated leniently according to law, so as to minimize social opposites, disintegrate crime and promote social harmony (Wang Wenhua, Yao Shuju 2020, 156). Although criminal behavior during the epidemic prevention and control period always adheres to the overall strictness, it does not exclude leniency according to law, and it can realize the organic unity of legal effect and social effect to the maximum extent.

The system of pleading guilty and accepting punishment with leniency

shall be applied according to law

In 2018, with the revision of the Criminal Procedure Law, system of lenient punishment for guilty pleas and punishment was formally established. This system has been widely used in judicial practice since it was established. In epidemic crime in 2020, the system of pleading guilty and lenient punishment was also widely used. Procuratorial organs implement the requirements of prevention and control according to law, and educate and encourage criminal suspects to truthfully confess and repent for minor criminal crime. The applicable rate of the system of pleading guilty and lenient punishment in epidemic cases of procuratorial organs in China is 86,6 %, and the applicable rate of pleading guilty and lenient punishment in epidemic cases of procuratorial organs in some provinces exceeds 90 % 2021. Accessed March 9,

2021. https://www.12309.gov.cn/nzw/jcyksjb/202103/t20210308_511580.shtml.. In ten batches of “Typical Cases”, this system was applied in many cases. For example, in the second batch of Typical Cases of Wang's nuisance of official duties in Renshou County, Sichuan Province, the Renshou County Procuratorate considered that the facts of the case were clear and evidence was true and sufficient. Wang confessed truthfully after arriving at the case and voluntarily pleaded guilty, which met the applicable conditions of the system of pleading guilty and lenient punishment. After the procu- ratorial organ interrogated, informed the litigation rights, and explained the law, Wang signed the confession and punishment statement and agreed to apply the quick ruling procedure in the presence of the duty lawyer and provided legal assistance. Zhao Moumou in Longyao County, Hebei Province, sought trouble. The judge of the case passed the interpretation of the law. Zhao Moumou pleaded guilty and sincerely repented, voluntarily signed the “Pledge of Confession and Punishment”, and agreed to apply the quick ruling procedure. In the fifth batch of “Typical Cases”, Wu Moumou voluntarily pleaded guilty at Yangchun City, Guangdong Province. Yangchun city Procuratorate decided to apply the System of lenient punishment for guilty plea and punishment to Wu Moumou, and filed a public prosecution with Xiangchun City Court, and suggested that summary procedure should be applied.

The implementation of the judicial concept of less arrest and caution

Less arrest and careful prosecution are also one of the important contents in our criminal policy. “Careful arrest and reduction of arrests” do not mean that criminal suspects are not arrested. Criminal suspects who should be arrested are arrested. If they are not arrested, this will not be enough to crack down on crime. Of course, “less arrest and caution” doesn't mean that all criminal suspects should be arrested, and it doesn't mean that arrest replaces investigation activities, promotes compensation by arrest, or broadens the role of arrest as a coercive measure (Lu Zhiqiang 2017, 7). On the one hand, the implementation of “Careful arrest and reduction of arrests” is an important manifestation of the procuratorial organs actively performing their duties; on the other hand, it can also prevent the occurrence of unjust, false, and wrong cases. To implement the judicial idea of less arrest and caution, first, criminal suspects with minor crime, less social harm, and less subjective malignancy should make a decision not to prosecute according to law, not to arrest them and save judicial resources. For example, in “Typical Cases”, Wang Moumou and Fu Moumou in Huzhou City, Zhejiang Province were suspected of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax 2020. Accessed March 5, 2021. https://www.spp.gov.cn/spp/xwfbh/wsfbt/202003/t20200320_456968.shtml#1.. The logistics company operated by Wang Moumou was one of the few local logistics enterprises that could resume work after the outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic, and undertook a number of transportation business of epidemic prevention materials. In order to ensure the smooth logistics of epidemic prevention materials and people's livelihood products, the court conscientiously implemented the criminal policy of combining leniency with severity, actively applied the system of pleading guilty and accepting punishment with leniency, comprehensively considered the subjective viciousness of Wang Moumou and Fu Moumou, investigated the amount of crime and the objective reality of paying back the taxes involved in the case, and made a decision not to prosecute Wang Moumou and Fu Moumou according to law. After explaining the law and giving targeted education on the rule of law, the criminal suspects were addressed in a timely manner. Second, arrest measures should be used with caution for criminal suspects, the necessity of detention should be examined for criminal suspects who have been arrested, and the compulsory measures should be changed in time for criminal suspects who do not need to be arrested. For those who have taken compulsory measures, the necessity of detention should be examined seriously, and if there is no necessity of detention, the compulsory measures should be changed promptly. In the case of an engineering company in Tianjin and Zhang Moumou suspected of bribery 2020. Accessed May 5, 2020. https://www.spp.gov.cn/spp/xwfbh/wsfbt/202003/t20200320_456968.shtml#1., after Zhang Moumou commissioned a defender to submit a review on the necessity of detention, the procuratorate found that the facts and evidence of Zhang Moumou's bribery case were clear and fixed, and there was no possibility of destruction, forgery of evidence, collusion, interference with witnesses' testimony, etc. Moreover, he pleaded guilty and acknowledged punishment, and the change of compulsory measures did not affect the proceedings and did not pose personal danger. At the same time, if Zhang Moumou continues to be detained, it will affect the promotion of municipal key projects undertaken by the company. In order to implement the Opinions of the Central Political and Legal Committee, the Supreme People's Court, and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Legal and Political Organs to Guarantee Resumption of Work and Resumption of Production during Epidemic Prevention and Control according to Law «^ÄÉÉØ^ØÉßÉØزÉÉØ^ÆßÆßÄÉÆ». 2020. Accessed March 31, 2021. http://www.moj.gov.cn/government_public/content/2020-03/02/tzwj_3243029.html., and to protect the normal development of private enterprises, Zhang Moumou was released on bail pending trial after seeking the opinions of the supervisory organs.

References

Chen, Xingliang, ed. 2004. China's criminal policy review. Beijing, Zhongguo jiancha chubanshe Publ. (In Chinese)

Gao, Ming Xuan 2019. “General principles of criminal law's Judicial Practice and Improvement”. Journal of National Prosecutor's College 27 (5): 13-22. (In Chinese)

Gao, Na, Feng Rui. 2020. “How to identify the crime of illegal business operation involving epidemic disease and driving up prices”. Jiancha ribao 3. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://www.spp.gov.cn/spp/ llyj/202003/t20200321_457032.shtml. (In Chinese)

He Huan, Mary. 2020. “Understanding and Application of Criminal Policy of Tempering Justice with Mercy in COVID-19 Epidemic Prevention and Control”. Zhongguo jianchaguan 8: 22-23. (In Chinese) Huang, Huasheng, Li Wenji. 2015. “An analysis of the judicial application of the network-based crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble”. Xingfa liincong 41 (1): 325-343. (In Chinese)

Li, Li. 2012. Judicial cognizance of false advertising crime. Beijing, Zhongyang minzu daxue Publ. (In Chinese)

Li, Xihui. 2007. A Probe into Criminal Law. Beijing, Zhongguo gongan daxue chubanshe Publ. (In Chinese) Lu, Zhiqiang. 2017. “Some thoughts on the implementation of the criminal policy of `less arrest and careful arrest' by procuratorial organs”. Renmin jiancha 4: 5-7. (In Chinese)

Ma, Xun, Deng Yuping, Zhang Jie, Xu Li. 2020. “Legal issues of manufacturing and selling fake and shoddy medical masks under the epidemic situation (part 2)”. Shanghai law journal B05. Accessed November 20, 2021. http://www.shfzb.com.cn/html/2020-03/11/content_902752.html. (In Chinese)

Qu, Xinjiu. 2013. “New regulations on combating online defamation: A more scientific and reasonable interpretation of criminal law”. Fazhi ribao 7. Accessed November 20, 2021. http://theory.people.com. cn/n/2013/0912/c40531-22898784.html. (In Chinese)

Shan, Min, Li Yingying. 2009. “Research on some problems of the crime of producing and selling fake and inferior products”. Zhongguo xingshi fa zhi 4: 52-56. (In Chinese)

Wang, Tao. 2020. “Analysis and identification of disputes in criminal cases involving epidemic situation”.

Shanghai gongan daxue xuebao 30 (1): 69-73. (In Chinese)

Wang, Wenhua, Yao Shuju. 2020. “The application of law and the balance of criminal policy in cases involving epidemic diseases”. Ren min jian cha 8: 152-157. (In Chinese)

Wang, Zhixiang. 2007. “Research on basic problems of amount crime”. Zhongguo xingshi fa zazhi 2: 42-51. (In Chinese)

Xiao, Yang, ed. 1996. China's criminal policy and strategy. Beijing, FalO chubanshe Publ. (In Chinese)

Xu, Juan. 2013. “The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate issued judicial interpretations, setting standards for online illegal activities such as fabricating information-making rumors on the Internet to disturb the order is to seek trouble”. Renmin ribao 4. Accessed November 20, 2021. https://news.12371.cn/2013/09/10/ARTI1378764249374203.shtml. (In Chinese)

Zhang, Kai. 2020. The cognizance of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods. Kaifeng, Henan daxue Publ. (In Chinese)

Zhang, Peng. 2020. Research on the Judicial Determination of the crime of seeking trouble by Internet Rumors. Beijing, Zhongguo renmin gongan daxue Publ. (In Chinese)

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru