Joker discusses governing and political administration: On the topic of assaulting others in public safety management.

Background#

A friend of mine (indeed a friend, for convenience, referred to as "our side") got into a fight with someone over a trivial matter, and both parties reported the incident to the police station to resolve the dispute.

During this process, after a medical examination, it was determined that the other party suffered minor injuries, while our side did not suffer any minor injuries, but the injuries to the other party were slightly more severe. At the same time, the other party's family presented a disability certificate, proving that the other party is a disabled person with hearing loss (not deaf).

After investigation, the police officer, Jingge, imposed administrative detention of 12 days and a fine of 500 yuan on our side, while the other party was released without any administrative punishment. Our side refused to sign, and was later forcibly detained.

Terminology Explanation:#

Jingge: A homonym for "police brother," an affectionate term for police comrades, reflecting the close relationship between the police and the people.
Serica: (Latin: Serica), meaning "Silk Country" or "Silk Country People," generally refers to China or the nearby regions of China, and is a term of praise for China.

Case Analysis#

This incident can be considered a typical trivial matter that occurs frequently among the people of Serica and is the most common type of case involving public security management that ordinary Serica people are likely to encounter.

The basis for Jingge's administrative punishment of our side is Article 43 of the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments of the People's Republic of China:

Whoever assaults another person or intentionally inflicts bodily harm on another person shall be detained for more than five days but less than ten days and shall be fined more than 200 yuan but less than 500 yuan; if the circumstances are relatively minor, he shall be detained for less than five days or fined less than 500 yuan.
Whoever commits any of the following acts shall be detained for more than ten days but less than fifteen days and shall be fined more than 500 yuan but less than 1,000 yuan:

(1) Assaulting or injuring others in a group;

(2) Assaulting or injuring disabled persons, pregnant women, persons under the age of fourteen, or persons over the age of sixty;

(3) Repeatedly assaulting or injuring others or assaulting or injuring multiple persons at one time.

In this case, the administrative penalty decision clearly states that Jingge imposed a heavier punishment on our side based on the second item of the second paragraph, "assaulting or injuring disabled persons, pregnant women, persons under the age of fourteen, or persons over the age of sixty."

There is no explicit explanation for not imposing administrative punishment on the other party, but according to oral statements, Jingge had stated that the other party was a disabled person, so no punishment was given.

Considering that the other party was actually more seriously injured and was the losing side in the fight, our side acknowledges to some extent that the other party should bear lighter responsibility, but does not acknowledge that the other party is not at fault.

Overall, the handling of this case is relatively fair but slightly flawed administrative action, and some details still deserve further consideration.

Point 1: Is it reasonable to impose a heavier punishment on our side because the other party is disabled?#

"The unity of subjective and objective" is a basic principle of criminal law, which means that when applying legal provisions, whether the subjective and objective aspects of any criminal act are consistent will have a significant impact on the final punishment. Of course, the case we are discussing today does not reach the level of a criminal case, but the administrative punishment we are discussing today is based on the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments of the People's Republic of China. When reading this law, should we follow the principle of the unity of subjective and objective? As a citizen of Serica, I have not been able to obtain a definitive answer to this question from any authoritative source.

But I believe that the unity of subjective and objective should be a basic principle for the application of any legal provision. I agree that assaulting disabled persons should be punished more severely because there is a significant subjective malice in bullying vulnerable groups. However, in this case, the other party's disability is hearing loss, and our side was not aware of this disability. This type of disability is different from disabilities such as limb loss and is not something that ordinary people can assume to know. In fact, our side had no subjective malice in bullying a disabled person and should not be subject to the second item of Article 43, Paragraph 2. Objectively speaking, the other party and our side got into a fight because of an argument. Our side could not have imagined that the other party was a hearing-impaired person, and their hearing impairment did not affect their ability to fight. During the fight, we were two equal individuals with equal power, but in the end, it was believed that our side was "bullying" the other party, which is indeed difficult to accept.

An example can illustrate the irrationality of this judgment. The American boxing champion, Evander Holyfield, had his ear bitten off by Mike Tyson and can also be considered a hearing-impaired person. If Holyfield came up to you and started a fight, you would also be considered bullying the weak. Disabled people should indeed be taken care of, but I believe that disabilities that do not affect fighting ability should not be considered in fighting cases. Therefore, Article 43 should be more specific and specify which types of disabilities of the assaulted person should be punished more severely.

Point 2: Is it legal to exempt the other party from administrative punishment because they are disabled?#

Jingge does have the power to exempt from punishment, but as we all know, the power to exempt from punishment is actually a very significant power. Twenty years ago, if your friend was caught by Jingge in Serica, no matter the reason, the only correct course of action was to use connections and money to "rescue" them. This discretionary power is actually a breeding ground for corruption. Therefore, many administrative agencies now make these discretionary powers public.

I found the "Shenzhen Public Security Bureau's Standards for Discretion in the Punishment of Violations of Public Security Management (2022 Edition)" and its provisions on assaulting others:

Circumstances	Punishment
General circumstances	Detention for more than five days but less than ten days and a fine of more than 200 yuan but less than 500 yuan.
The following circumstances belong to "relatively minor" offenses: 1. The victim is at fault and the harm is relatively minor; 2. Disputes between relatives, neighbors, or colleagues over trivial matters, where both parties are at fault and the harm is relatively minor; 3. Students over the age of fourteen who are attending school and commit their first offense of assaulting others, show remorse, and the harm is relatively minor; 4. Disputes arising from civil matters and the offender voluntarily compensates reasonable expenses, and the harm is relatively minor; 5. Other relatively minor circumstances.	Detention for less than five days or a fine of less than 500 yuan.
The following circumstances belong to offenses that are more severe: 1. Assaulting others in a group; 2. Assaulting disabled persons, pregnant women, persons under the age of fourteen, or persons over the age of sixty; 3. Repeatedly assaulting others or assaulting multiple persons at one time.	Detention for more than ten days but less than fifteen days and a fine of more than 500 yuan but less than 1,000 yuan.

In the face of a fight case, ordinary people are always concerned about who insulted or attacked first. In fact, in fight cases, as long as someone is involved, they will be punished, but there will be differences in severity.

In this case, the other party's assault on our side falls under the category of "disputes between colleagues, both parties at fault, and relatively minor harm." For the assault committed by the other party against our side under these circumstances, Jingge has publicly stated through the benchmark document of his discretionary power that he does not have the power to exempt from punishment. In a situation that does not reach the level of a criminal case, individuals do not have the so-called right to "justifiable defense." The other party's assault on our side is an objective fact, and exempting them from punishment actually contradicts the benchmark of Jingge's publicly disclosed discretionary power.

The Issue of Disabled People in Serica#

I would also like to briefly discuss the issue of disabled people in Serica. As of 2022, the population of disabled people in Serica has reached 85 million. This proportion is not inappropriate and is comparable to other regions in the world, but this number is still shocking and significantly different from the general public's perception.

The privileges of disabled people in Serica society have long been no secret. In rural areas of Serica, people have long been eager to obtain disability certificates, often needing to rely on connections for assistance. The main purpose is to find ways to increase their disability rating in order to receive more government subsidies. The amount of subsidies is not large, ranging from about 100 to 300 yuan. However, for impoverished rural areas, this is definitely a significant amount of money, equivalent to the price of several thousand kilograms of grain per year. At the same time, in rural areas of Serica, it has become a folk custom to find a disabled person with obvious limb disabilities to lead the way and maintain order when there is a need to cause trouble. However, at least they would find a disabled person with obvious limb disabilities, aiming to reduce the possibility of conflict. Compared to recklessly causing conflicts by relying on their status as disabled people, this is a more benevolent approach.

When formulating laws, it is indeed a judicial oversight to grant privileges to a group of 85 million people without conducting further research and discussion.

Who has the power to interpret the law?#

When there is controversy or ambiguity in the law, it can actually be supplemented by interpreting the law. The power to interpret the law is mainly exercised by the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Supreme People's Court, the State Council, and the National People's Congress, with limited power for the National People's Congress. The public security department does not actually have the power to interpret the law. If a police officer tells you, "I believe that he is a disabled person and should be exempt from punishment," but cannot find any provisions in the law to support their judgment, it is completely illegal.

Regarding the second item of Article 43, I believe that the main dispute lies in whether the assault on disabled persons requires subjective knowledge. I believe that it does, as this is a basic principle of most laws. However, Jingge believes that subjective knowledge is not required. I am curious about why Jingge believes that subjective knowledge is not required, so I consulted a friend who understands the law. He recommended that I read the "Interpretation and Practical Guide to the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments" and told me that Jingge's handling of the case is actually quite simple, just follow this book and look up the definitions. Suddenly, I realized that Elon Musk indeed understands Serica better than Karl Marx. He once said that the world appears to be a complex and sophisticated machine, but in reality, it is a stage play. I won't discuss the content of this book for now. First of all, it may just be a textbook written by a professor leading a few unlucky graduate students for the purpose of project completion. It certainly has some value, but it does not have legal effect and can only be used as a reference for daily work. Treating it as an authoritative standard is a big mistake.

The book "Interpretation and Practical Guide to the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments" quotes the "Interpretation by the Ministry of Public Security on Issues Concerning the Implementation of the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments of the People's Republic of China (II)" issued by the Ministry of Public Security in 2007. Article 7 of the interpretation states:

7. Regarding the punishment for assaulting or injuring specific individuals

The punishment for acts that violate the second item of Article 43 of the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments does not require the subjective knowledge of the offender that the person being assaulted or injured is a disabled person, pregnant woman, person under the age of fourteen, or person over the age of sixty.

In other words, Jingge actually believes that the determination of assaulting disabled persons does not require subjective knowledge based on a "legislative interpretation" document from his superior agency.

But I believe that assaulting disabled persons should require subjective knowledge. First, the number of disabled people in Serica has reached 85 million, and I have rarely seen disabled people walking on the streets, indicating that these disabled people are either unable to move and are trapped at home, or they are hidden among the crowd and live a completely normal life that ordinary people cannot recognize. We should grant privileges to those disabled people who are unable to participate in fights on an equal footing due to their disabilities. Second, this textbook and a document issued by an agency without the power to interpret the law do not have legal effect, and the unity of subjective and objective is a basic principle. Without subjective knowledge, the punishment should not be increased.

How to Express Dissent?#

Being detained can be a big or small matter. If it were twenty years ago and you were detained for not carrying a temporary residence permit when going out, you might end up in a detention center for reeducation through labor. Nowadays, as Serica society gradually moves towards civilization and the law becomes more perfect, going to the police station will not result in the loss of life, but individuals who are not frequently detained still feel at a loss when facing the interrogation room, forced actions, and threatening words. So I will briefly share how to express dissent to Jingge.

Carefully read the statements and various documents, and raise objections to anything you disagree with and refuse to sign;
If you are dissatisfied with the administrative punishment, immediately apply for administrative reconsideration, and if there is a detention punishment, immediately apply for administrative reconsideration and apply for a stay of detention. Of course, the probability of a retrial through administrative reconsideration is extremely low, and detention may be delayed, but you generally cannot escape it;
If you are dissatisfied with the administrative reconsideration, you should file an administrative lawsuit with the People's Court.

As for me, I have objections to the legal provisions and their "interpretations." This is the most difficult part. As a citizen who has lived in Serica for decades, I have not been able to figure out how citizens can express dissent to the law and its interpretations through any channels.

Of course, many laws and regulations have a period of public notice and solicitation of opinions before they take effect. During this period, ordinary people can express their opinions. I paid attention to the recent "Public Notice on the Solicitation of Opinions on the 'Trial Implementation of the Discretionary Standards for the Punishment of Violations of Public Security Management by Public Security Organs in Guangdong Province'" which has ended, but there was only one comment by a person named Jane Abstraction, who wrote a flattering comment:

Standardizing law enforcement behavior and correctly exercising discretionary standards to continue improvement in practice.

But I read it over and over again and felt that it lacked something. In the end, I concluded that it was probably due to the inability to post handwritten comments on the internet. If this comment had the two characters "agree" written in cursive, it would not feel so abrupt.

It can be seen that in the process of formulating laws and regulations in Serica, the people have no awareness of participating, and the officials have no motivation to involve more people. Some silent pieces of paper filled with words quietly float to the hall, ruling over the eating, drinking, and daily lives of all Serica people.

Lessons Learned#

Do not get into fights with others. Rejecting violence should be the bottom line of a civilized society.
If the other party is eager to fight with you, it is likely that they have a disability certificate as a trump card. You should be cautious.
Minimize unnecessary interactions with Serica people and live a life similar to Arthur Schopenhauer's, which allows you to live as peacefully and calmly as possible.