>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Yixing People's Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province v. Ding Xifang (Case of Crime of Irregularities for Favoritism and Non-transferring Criminal Cases)
江苏省宜兴市人民检察院诉丁锡方徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件案
【法宝引证码】
  • Type of Dispute: Criminal-->Dereliction of Duty
  • Legal document: Judgment
  • Judgment date: 06-19-2002
  • Procedural status: Trial at Second Instance

Yixing People’s Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province v. Ding Xifang (Case of Crime of Irregularities for Favoritism and Non-transferring Criminal Cases)
(Case of Crime of Irregularities for Favoritism and Non-transferring Criminal Cases)
江苏省宜兴市人民检察院诉丁锡方徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件案

Yixing People's Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province v. Ding Xifang
(Case of Crime of Irregularities for Favoritism and Non-transferring Criminal Cases)@#
BASIC FACTS@#
Prosecutorial Organ: Yixing People's Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province.@#
Defendant: Ding Xifang, male, 40, former director of the forestry management division and group commander of the forestry management inspection team under the Yixing Forestry Bureau of Jiangsu Province, and dwelled at home under surveillance as of November 7, 2001.@#
PROCEDURAL POSTURE@#
Yixing People's Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province prosecuted to the Yixing People's Court of Jiangsu Province against Ding Yifang (hereinafter referred to as Ding) for the crime of irregularities for favoritism and non-transferring criminal cases.@#
The bill of indictment describes that: When Ding was investigating and handling the case of deforestation of Shangba Village, Fudong Town, Yixing City (hereinafter referred to as Shangba Village), he accepted the intercession of other people and illegally handled the case in which the criminal liability shall be imposed as a case of administrative punishment, so his act had violated Article 402 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to the Criminal Law) and constituted the crime of irregularities for favoritism of non-transferring criminal cases. We are now instituting a public prosecution, and please punish him according to law.@#
The prosecutorial organ submitted the following evidences to the court:@#
1. the testimonies of witnesses Gu Huizhong, Pan Dechang and Qian Jingqiu et.al, which mainly state that: in the afternoon of April 18, 2001, Ding et. al came to the audit office of Fudong Town to investigate the sales of woods by Shangba Village in 1999 and 2000, and the relevant manuscripts on checking accounts could affirm this fact;@#
2. the testimonies of witnesses Wang Mingjun and Fan Jianxing et. al, the leaders of Fudong Town as well as the meeting records, which mainly state that: When Ding was circulating a notice on the case of deforestation of Shangba Village on April 20, he said that this village had additionally felled more than 600 cubic meters of trees and the persons-in-charge of the village should assume the criminal liability for this. When the leaders of Fudong Town interceded with him for not imposing criminal liabilities to the persons-in-charge of the village, Ding said that he could manage it so as to impose an administrative penalty upon Shangba Village by taking flexible measures, namely, altering the accounts on the sales of woods;@#
......

 

江苏省宜兴市人民检察院诉丁锡方徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件案@#
@#
公诉机关:江苏省宜兴市人民检察院。@#
被告人:丁锡方,男,40岁,原系江苏省宜兴市林副业局林政科科长兼林政稽查大队大队长,2001年11月7日被监视居住。@#
@#
江苏省宜兴市人民检察院以被告人丁锡方犯徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪,向江苏省宜兴市人民法院提起公诉。@#
起诉书指控:被告人丁锡方在查处宜兴市伏东镇上坝村的滥伐林木案件时接受说情,擅自将本应移交追究刑事责任的案件作行政处罚处理,其行为触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》(以下简称刑法)第四百零二条的规定,构成徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪。特提起公诉,请依法判处。@#
公诉机关向法庭提交了以下证据:@#
1.顾惠忠、潘德场、钱景球等证人的证言,主要内容是:2001年4月18日下午,丁锡方等人到伏东镇审计办,由丁锡方调查上坝村1999年和2000年销售林木账的情况,有关查账底稿可印证这一事实。@#
2.伏东镇领导王明君、范剑兴等证人的证言和会议记录,主要内容是:丁锡方于4月20日通报上坝村滥伐林木案时,称该村超伐600多立方米,村负责人要负刑事责任。当镇领导要求不追究村负责人的刑事责任时,丁锡方表示可进行技术处理,对上坝村作行政处罚,但需要改动销售林木的账。@#
3.宜兴市林副业局方允良、何国强等证人的证言,主要内容是:丁锡方未向其汇报查处上坝村滥伐林木的真实情况。@#
4.李小金、郑心煜等证人的证言,主要内容是:上坝村销售的林木,均为砍伐本村的林木。@#
5.林业行政处罚决定书,主要内容是:宜兴市林副业局认定上坝村滥伐林木的立木蓄积量为17.9888立方米,因此给予相关处罚。@#
6.上坝村销售林木汇总表及补充材料,主要内容是:上坝村1999年和2000年销售林木的品种、单价、数量、金额。@#
7.宜兴市林副业局出具的关于本市范围内松、杉、杂树重量与蓄积换算标准的说明。@#
此外,公诉机关还提交了丁锡方的任职文件、本案发案经过和丁锡方的供述等材料。@#
被告人丁锡方辩称:上坝村滥伐林木案件是由江苏省无锡市多种经营管理局(以下简称无锡市多种经营管理局)管辖的,并非由我查处,责任不能由我承担。@#
丁锡方的辩护人提出:1.上坝村的滥伐林木案件是由无锡市多种经营管理局查处的,丁锡方不构成徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪的犯罪主体;2.把上坝村销售林木的重量换算成立木蓄积量,这种计算滥伐林木数量的方式和换算标准不符合法律规定。上坝村2000年实际超伐数量仅是88.8立方米;3.根据法律和司法解释的规定,上坝村滥伐林木的数量够不上追究刑事责任,故丁锡方的行为不属情节严重,构不成徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪。@#
辩护人向法庭提交了江苏省森林资源监测中心对上坝村当年采伐情况的初步调查结果。@#
宜兴市人民法院经审理查明:@#
2001年4月18日上午,被告人丁锡方和无锡市多种经营管理局林政处副处长顾惠忠等人调查宜兴市伏东镇上坝村村民举报的该村滥伐林木案件时,通过查上坝村1999年和2000年销售林木账,发现该村这二年滥伐林木约600立方米。4月20日,丁锡方向伏东镇领导通报查处情况时表示,上坝村滥伐林木情节严重,有关人员要受刑事处罚。当伏东镇领导要求“不要抓人”后,丁锡方接受镇领导的说情,授意要改动该村的销售林木账,将滥伐林木数量降至20立方米以下,以便对该村进行行政处罚。丁锡方未向本局领导汇报案件的真实情况,仅以顾惠忠等人于4月18日下午调查时所画的三份现场图为依据,擅自将上坝村滥伐林木的数量定为17.9888立方米,导致本局于4月27日决定对上坝村进行林业行政处罚。@#
另查明,上坝村1999年和2000年实际滥伐林木552.195立方米,其负责人因涉嫌滥伐林木罪,已由宜兴市人民检察院提起公诉。@#
上述事实,有公诉机关提交的证据证实。这些证据经庭审质证、认证,可以作为认定本案事实的根据。@#
宜兴市人民法院认为:@#
刑法四百零二条规定:“行政执法人员徇私舞弊,对依法应当移交司法机关追究刑事责任的不移交,情节严重的,处三年以下有期徒刑或者拘役;造成严重后果的,处三年以上七年以下有期徒刑。”被告人丁锡方身为行政执法机关的工作人员,在受命与上级机关一起查办案件的过程中,明知伏东镇上坝村二年内滥伐林木数额巨大,违反了森林法刑法的规定,有关人员的行为已经涉嫌犯罪,应当将案件移交给其他部门处理,却应他人的请求徇私舞弊.隐瞒真相,以行政处罚来代替刑事处理,放纵犯罪,情节严重,其行为已触犯刑法四百零二条的规定,构成徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪,应依法惩处。@#
......


Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥700.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese