Media: Visitors who duplicate their family ID cards have been sentenced to some severe punishment

 Media: Visitors who duplicate their family ID cards have been sentenced to some severe punishment

Criminal law is a sharp weapon. It should be modest and restrained. It should not be guilty if it can not be guilty of illegal acts with minor circumstances and little harm to society.

Song Guiqing, a visitor to Fenyang, Shanxi Province, was sentenced to one year and nine monthsimprisonment by the courts of Xiaoyi and Luliang for forgery of identity cards after making three false identity cards of himself, his sister Song Guilin and his father Song Ruican by means of photo copying for fear of being confiscated by the interviewees. After the appeal started retrial, the recent retrial of Lvliang Intermediate Court has yielded results: due to the amendment of the Criminal Law Amendment (9), the crime of forging resident identity cards by Song Guiqing has changed into the crime of forging identity cards, and the sentencing still maintains the original sentence of one year and nine months.

It is noteworthy that even the Fenyang Municipal Complaints and Visits Service Center, which is in charge of letters and visits, believes that the forgery of identity cards related to letters and visits is a wrong case and issued a review report to Shanxi Provincial Higher Court before retrial. Then the Shanxi Provincial High Court ordered the case to be retried. It can be seen that the order retrial is directly related to the review report.

According to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, the higher court will order the lower court to retrial only when it finds that the lower court has made a mistake in its effective judgment, and the lower court must retry. It can be concluded that the views of Shanxi Higher Court are consistent with those of the evaluation report.

Of course, the order of Shanxi High Court for retrial is only the result of the appeal review procedure, while the retrial decision of Luliang Middle Court is made by the second instance procedure. In theory, not all cases ordered to be retried have to be re-adjudicated - although most cases will be re-adjudicated.

Specifically, in this case, I agree with the views of Fenyang Law-related Complaints and Visits Service Center and Shanxi Higher Court. It is worth discussing that the original judgment should be maintained in retrial.

On December 10, 2018, Song Guiqing held the judgment of Luliang Intermediate Court of Shanxi Province. Respondents for map

There is no dispute that Song Guiqings behavior belongs to forging resident identity documents. Forgery of identity documents refers to the act of making resident identity documents (tangible forgery in theory) by persons without the right to produce identity documents and making resident identity documents (invisible forgery in theory) by persons with the right to produce resident identity documents in violation of the law. Villager Song Guiqings behavior obviously belongs to the former one, which is prohibited by law.

Its behavior is not completely as totally harmless to society as it argues. For example, her forged identity documents can not be directly identified on the ID card reader. When used, it will increase the efficiency and cost of identification of the relevant organs and affect the social management order to some extent.

However, it should also be noted that her forged identity documents are only used for petitions, and the duplicated identity information is real. When the relevant authorities identify him and his relatives, it is not difficult to identify the real identity through the ID number and face recognition equipment, so the harm is very small. However, a certain degree of social harmfulness and violation of the law, including violation of the criminal law, may not constitute a crime, because Article 13 of the Criminal Law clearly stipulates that all acts harmful to the society are crimes that should be punished by penalty according to law, but if the circumstances are significant and minor, they are not considered crimes.

Duplication and forgery of identity documents should bear certain legal consequences since they are illegal and have certain social harmfulness. There is nothing wrong with its accountability, and it is also conducive to warning and curbing this kind of behavior.

Considering that the crime of forging identity documents is a kind of crime separated from the crime of forging state organ documents, the legal penalty of the latter is slightly heavier than that of the former, and the Law on Administrative Penalties for Public Security has a convergence provision for the latter - If the circumstances are significant and slight and do not constitute the crime of forging state organ documents, the penalty of public security management can be imposed, I think. It is more reasonable to impose penalties on public security management.

The crime of forging documents of state organs does not require the quantity of crime. It is not a crime of forgery. This is also true of the crime of forging identity documents. After all, criminal law is a sharp weapon, we should maintain modesty and try not to be guilty if we can not be guilty.

Source: Author of New Beijing News: Liu Changsongs Responsible Editor: Jike_b6492