Investigation into driver’s killing sets example for justifiable homicide cases

ON SATURDAY, the local police in Kunshan, East China’s Jiangsu province, announced that a man who killed his attacker would not be prosecuted as the death was a case of justifiable homicide. Zhao Lei, a partner lawyer and deputy director of the Beijing Zewen Law Firm, comments:

During the past week, the case in Kunshan attracted nationwide attention, with the majority of voices online claiming that the man should be considered innocent. Now, having made its final conclusion, the local police have withdrawn the case against him, and he will not face any charges.

The decision is significant in at least three aspects.

First, according to the Criminal Law: “If a person acts in self-defense against an ongoing assault, murder, robbery, rape, kidnap or any other crime of violence that seriously endangers his/her personal safety, thus causing injury or death to the perpetrator of the unlawful act, it is not undue defense, and he/she shall not bear criminal responsibility.”

However, in judicial practice, that clause has so seldom been applied that some call it a “sleeping clause”. But it has woken up when needed.

Second, there is a “modest constraint” principle for the Criminal Law, namely it is the last defense of social order, and the judiciary should not apply it to every case. But the police and the procuratorate have followed this principle as necessary in this instance.

Third, during the whole investigation, both the police and the procuratorate have maintained positive interaction with the public. The law has granted judicial departments the responsibility of spreading the sense of rule of law among the public, and the local police and procuratorate have honored that duty.

By explaining clearly the details of the case, the local police and procuratorate have also set a standard for justifiable self-defense.