Volume 1, Issue 3, September 2018, Page: 108-114
Malpractices and Path of Reform Concerning Psychiatric Identification in China—Taking the “Heading-cutting Case” Committed by Hu as an Entry Point
Li Zhenjie, Department of Law, Southwest University of Political Science & Law, Chongqing, China
Tang Yiliang, Department of Law, Southwest University of Political Science & Law, Chongqing, China
Received: Sep. 10, 2018;       Accepted: Oct. 12, 2018;       Published: Nov. 5, 2018
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijls.20180103.12      View  75      Downloads  5
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed a frequent increase in the number of crimes committed by the mentally ill, which accordingly leads to more cases that psychiatric perpetrators were exempted from liability, exemplified by the “head-cutting case” committed by Hu in Wuchang. However, exempting the mentally ill from criminal liability is only an exception as for imposing liabilities on criminal subjects. In judicial practice, it should be limited in use as much as possible to avoid instability occurring in the criminal law system due to the expansion of its application. At present, there are still many defects in the regulations on the mentally ill in China. On the one hand, it is difficult to provide a clear and practical definition of the exemption for the mentally ill. On the other hand, a series of problems have arisen since the public would hold doubts about the exemption for some defendants. In order to prevent "false" psychiatric identification and guarantee the effectiveness of the exemption exclusively to the mentally ill, it is necessary to analyze the value basis of exemption for the mentally ill and deconstruct some standards of psychiatric identification and related legal provisions. It should be further realized that the current psychiatric identification mainly has three defects including vague legal provisions, varied standards of identification, and improper entity in charge of initiating the identification. Given this, the paper has proposed solutions from four aspects, i.e., clarifying the standards for identifying mental illness, standardizing the criteria for admission of the appraisers, determining appropriate entity for initiating the identification, and severely punishing "false" psychiatric identification.
Keywords
Mental Illness, Mandatory Medical Treatment, Judicial Appraisal, Identification Standards
To cite this article
Li Zhenjie, Tang Yiliang, Malpractices and Path of Reform Concerning Psychiatric Identification in China—Taking the “Heading-cutting Case” Committed by Hu as an Entry Point, International Journal of Law and Society. Vol. 1, No. 3, 2018, pp. 108-114. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20180103.12
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
Netease News: http://news.163.com/17/0219/18/CDLHLBCD0001875P.html, accessed on May 1, 2017.
[2]
Li Naling: Judicial Judgment of "the Mentally Ill" in Criminal Mandatory Medical Treatment, Law Science Magazine, Vol. 8, 2016, p. 119.
[3]
Zhang Wenxian: Research on the Tendency of Methodological Philosophical Thoughts in the Twentieth Century, Law Press, 1996, p. 549.
[4]
Marx: Selected Works of Marx and Engels, People's Publishing House, 1972, p. 125.
[5]
[English] Jimmy Bentham: Theory of Legislation, translated by Li Guifang, Chinese People's Public Security University Press (version 2014), p. 65.
[6]
Hao Wei: Psychiatry, People's Publishing House, 2001, vol. 1.
[7]
Chu Chencheng: The Systematic Defects and Reconstruction of Psychiatric Identification Rules in Criminal Judgment, Research on Rule of Law, Vol. 2, 2018, p. 153.
[8]
He Hongqiang: On the System of Criminal Defendants' Ability to Trial in China, Legal Forum, Vol. 5, 2016, p. 146.
[9]
Wang Junwei: Review of the Relief Mechanism for China's Mandatory Treatment, Law, 2016, Vol. 12, p. 131.
[10]
Sun Hao: The Distribution of Proof Responsibility for Psychiatric Issues in Criminal Proceedings, Law Science Magazine, Vol. 1, 2017, p. 105.
[11]
There are data showing that the inconsistency rate between the appraisal opinions in the same case currently in China has reached about 30%. See Ye Shengbin: Introduction to Mandatory Medical Procedures, Political and Legal Forum, Vol. 1, 2014.
[12]
Chen Bangda: Empirical Research on Initiating Procedure for Psychiatric Judicial Identification, Law Application, Vol. 23, 2017, p. 63.
[13]
Sina.com: "The Killing Maniac" Qiu Xinghua's Mental Illness in Suspense, website: http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2006-12-13/190611782060.shtml, accessed on May 1, 2017.
[14]
Chen Yiwei: On the Abuse and Prevention of Psychiatric Identification Procedures in the Process of Criminal Proceedings, Crime Research, Vol. 6, 2017, p. 102.
[15]
Zhang Qinting: Discussion on the Focus Issues about Judicial Identification of the Criminal Liabilities for the Mentally Ill, Chinese Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 6, 2015, p. 47.
[16]
He Xiaojun: The Paradox and Solution of Psychiatric Identification, Science of Evidence Law, Vol. 1, 2016, p. 98.
Browse journals by subject