Chinese system of accessory to crime as a monistic system

Abstract

In Criminal Law are identified two systems of complicity in crime: differentiated and monistic. The first one is accepted in such countries as Germany, Switzerland, France, Spain, Netherlands, Japan and some others. The system of complicity is used in such countries as Austria, Norway, Denmark, Italy, Sweden, Brazil, the countries of the former Soviet Union, the Czech Republic, etc. Today, most Chinese researchers claim that PRC has adopted a dualistic system of participation that distinguishes between performing and complicity — so called, “differentiated system”. There are certain grounds for such a conclusion in the provisions of the Criminal Code of the PRC, but they should not be interpreted unambiguously against the monistic system. At the same time, some scientists believe that the Chinese Criminal Law adopted a monistic system of participation or a system of a single performer — a uniform system. The legal grounds for this conclusion can also be found in the provisions of the Criminal Code of the PRC. To compare the two systems in the study, examples are given from some Criminal Laws, including consideration of different forms of complicity and roles of accessory to crimes. According to the author, the Chinese Criminal Law does not realise a dualistic system of participation that distinguishes between performance and complicity. Our arguments in favor of this position are presented in this comparative legal and critical study. This study is providing for the first time. For this, in particular, the interpretation of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the PRC, as well as examples of hypothetical crimes and the qualification of the actions of the persons participating in them are given.