The standard for establishing knowingly in Chinas crime of assisting information network criminal activities has long posed challenges in the Chinese judicial practice. The unidirectional and indirect nature of this offence often created barriers for judicial authorities from effectively deducing the defendant's subjective intention through direct evidence. This paper studies the evolution from "knowing destruction" to "magnificent crime" in the standards for establishing "knowingly" in the crime of assisting information network criminal activities. The result shows that recently, Chinese judicial system faces an imbalance between effectively combating crime and safeguarding individual human rights. Since 2019, judicial interpretation issued by the Supreme People's Court and Supreme Peoples Procuratorate in China has lower the standard for establishing knowingly in Chinas crime of assisting information network related Criminal activities from certain knowing to general knowing. However, general knowing heavily relies on objective facts such as abnormal transaction records to presume the defendants intention. At the same time, this shift has decreased the standard and boundaries of knowingly, it has essentially by passed a genuine inquiry into the defendants subjective awareness, resulting in an overly vague identification standard. Therefore, the doctrine of wilful blindness from Anglo and American criminal law offers a new approach to reconstructing the standard for establishing knowingly in the crime of assisting information network criminal activities. wilful blindness can help by first identifying red flags by examining whether the defendant has aware of any suspicious signs and determine did the defendant deliberately avoided confirming those signs.
Yi Hin Tuen Muk (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: