Presiding Judge and People's Juror of Public Prosecution Opinion: Today, Xiaoshan District People's Court held a public hearing to hear the case of Wu Genliang, the defendant who filed a public prosecution in our hospital. According to the provisions of Article 153 of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and Article 15 of the Organic Law of People's Procuratorate, he was appointed by the chief procurator of our hospital to appear in court as a state prosecutor to support public prosecution and perform his legal supervision duties according to law. In the court investigation just now, the prosecutor interrogated the defendant Wu Genliang according to law, and read and produced a large number of documentary evidence and witness testimony. Although the defendant Wu Genliang evaded the importance and shirked the responsibility in some links, a large amount of evidence is enough to prove the criminal facts of the defendant Wu Genliang and should be punished by law. In order to better perform the public prosecutor's duties and clarify the public prosecutor's point of view, we hereby put forward the following public prosecution opinions on this case, and ask the collegial panel to fully consider and adopt them when deliberating. 1. Defendant Wu Genliang, as a judicial officer, bending the law, deliberately shielded a person who knew he was guilty from prosecution, which constituted the crime of bending the law for selfish ends. Whether it is the crime of bending the law for selfish ends as stipulated in Article 399 of the current Criminal Law or the crime of practicing favoritism as stipulated in Article 188 of the Criminal Law of 1979, it reflects the determination and strength to crack down on judicial staff's dereliction of duty and judicial corruption. According to the law, the crime of bending the law for selfish ends refers to the behavior of judicial staff who bend the law because of bending the law. L, the main body is the judicial staff, that is, the staff responsible for investigation, prosecution, trial or supervision. The defendant in this case, Wu Genliang, is the director of Kaihua County Public Security Bureau, the secretary of the Party Committee, and the director of the public security bureau. His main identity is judicial staff. 2. The subjective aspect is intentional. That is, knowingly committing a crime, the purpose of the crime is to indulge criminals and wronged good people, and the result is an entry crime. The motive of a crime can be favoritism or favoritism. Defendant Wu Genliang only accepted Xu xx, Hu X and others' requests for help and invited them to dinner, and only after considering the smooth development of future work did he commit the act of bending the law. 3. Objectively, it is manifested as the behavior of judicial staff using their powers to pervert the law. There are three situations: (1) using judicial power to prosecute people who know they are innocent; (two) the use of judicial power to deliberately shield people who know they are guilty from prosecution; (three) the use of judicial power, deliberately contrary to the facts in judicial activities, making a judgment that perverts the law. Wu Genliang's behavior belongs to the second situation. Wu Genliang knows the seriousness of the case of illegally manufacturing guns, that other accomplices in the case have been sentenced to severe punishment, and that bail pending trial is about to expire, so he should be transferred to the procuratorate for examination and prosecution. Because he accepted others' intercession and lost his basic principles, he decided not to take the initiative to transfer any case to prosecution, which led to a criminal who should have been sentenced to heavy punishment at large for nearly two years without being punished as he should. 4. The object of infringement is the normal activities of the state judicial organs. Judicial organs are an important tool of people's democratic dictatorship and an important part of state institutions. Judicial personnel have the right to enforce the law, which requires them to be loyal to the interests of the country and the people, to the law, to the truth, not to waste or neglect. If you abuse your power by bending the law, it will undermine the normal activities of the state judicial organs and damage their prestige among the people. Because of the defendant Wu Genliang's behavior, it affected the normal activities of Kaihua County Public Security Bureau and caused extremely bad influence in the hearts of local people. To sum up, the defendant Wu Genliang, as a judicial officer, bending the law, used his power to deliberately shield a person who knew he was guilty so that he would not be prosecuted. His behavior fully conforms to the constitutive requirements of the crime of favoritism and malpractice and should be punished according to law. 2. The lesson of the defendant Wu Genliang's malpractice case. Looking through Wu Genliang's resume, we can see that he was born in an ordinary peasant family and worked as a substitute teacher after graduating from high school. Joined the public security team at the age of 22, starting from the most basic level. Worked in pre-trial unit, public security unit, police station, secretarial section and other departments. 190 served as deputy director of Changshan county public security bureau in July, 1990,/kloc-0 served as political commissar in July, 1995, and in June of the same year 10 exchanged views with Kaihua county public security bureau as director. It should be said that Wu Genliang has really put a lot of effort and sweat into growing from an ordinary peasant son to a public security chief. Wu Genliang is only 45 years old this year. He is in the prime of life. He should have worked hard to better repay the society. But today, he has fallen from the top spot of the Public Security Bureau and stood in the dock for legal trial. The contrast between being a police chief and being a prisoner is too strong, and the prosecutor also feels sorry for it. Investigating the reasons, the public prosecutor believes that: 1, emotion is greater than law, and perverting the law are the main reasons why Wu Genliang embarked on the road of crime. People live in society rather than in a vacuum, and we in China pay the most attention to human feelings, so we will have our own relatives and friends. However, as a law enforcer, we should keep a clear head. In the choice of emotion and law, there is always only one answer: never trade the law. Unfortunately, Wu Genliang failed to grasp the relationship, lost in the contest between love and law, and was swallowed up by his lover and his lover's feelings. The expansion of power and his own will are also one of the reasons why Wu Genliang embarked on the road of crime. At present, bending the law mostly occurs in public security organs, which is determined by many factors such as wide coverage, relatively large power and paramilitary units. It can be seen from a large number of facts investigated and verified by the court that Wu Genliang knows the seriousness of the case. At that time, Jiang xx, the deputy director in charge, had signed an agreement to sue and submitted it for printing. Qiu xx, the chief of the Pre-trial Section, also sought him for many times to reflect the situation, inform the case and analyze the advantages and disadvantages. But under the influence of others' intercession, Wu Genliang didn't listen at all. 1July 1996 to1April 1997, due to the expiration of bail pending trial, the decision was not studied in Qiu xx Bureau. According to the opinion of consent to prosecution signed by Director Jiang, Wu Genliang agreed to submit it to the Party Committee of the Bureau for study and discussion under the repeated urging of transfer for review and prosecution before 13. What kind of meeting is the seminar that has been delayed for almost a year? Just a few minutes of impromptu meeting, just a meeting without the participation of case handlers, just a meeting with Wu Genliang in charge. The meeting was hasty, the decision was hasty, and the conclusion was hasty. If Wu Genliang could go deep into the grass roots and listen to the facts of the comrades in charge of the pre-trial department, and if Chief Executive Wu Genliang could have an extra supervision procedure when exercising his power, Wu Genliang would not have fallen to this point today. 3. The mediator played a disgraceful role in this case, which was the external factor for Wu Genliang to embark on the road of crime. In the list of lovers, there are local prosecutors and factory directors of local key enterprises. In this small mountain city of Hua Kai, they are all bigwigs. They pleaded with Wu Genliang for the same person and asked them to take care of them. It was a big face. Wu Genliang didn't take good care of these powerful people's intercession and invite them to dinner, and finally he committed the act of bending the law. The prosecutor hopes that through today's trial, the defendant Wu Genliang will truly realize the social harm caused by his actions. It not only trampled on the law, but also brought great damage to the overall image of civilized public security organs and civilized political and legal teams. At the same time, I also hope that the people who participate in the trial of the case can learn from it, take a warning and make good use of the law enforcement power entrusted by the people. Presiding judge and judge: Finally, the public prosecutor put forward the following opinions on the sentencing of the defendant Wu Genliang: The defendant Wu Genliang, who perverted the law, deliberately shielded a person who knew he was guilty and prevented him from being prosecuted, and his behavior constituted a crime. According to the principle of lighter punishment for the elderly, the provisions of Article 188 of Criminal Law 79 are applied, and he is found guilty of bending the law for selfish ends and should be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years. At the same time, please ask the collegial panel to seriously consider Wu Genliang's guilty attitude and make a fair judgment based on his performance in the trial.