'+data.XMPS_USERNAME+', welcome to login Logout
You have 0 new messages
Register for the new Min e conference and earn points immediately!
Indeed, the traffic police department in Leping has taken a great stride in freeing their thinking. According to reports from China National Radio, the traffic police in Leping, Jiangxi province have introduced a system where fines can be prepaid on a seasonal or yearly basis, similar to gasoline prices. The ostensible justification is compelling: the traffic police receive the fines they are supposed to collect without hassle, and drivers benefit by not having to pay fines repeatedly even if they violate traffic rules daily.
Fresh surprises happen every day, and today we have another one.
The traffic police department in Leping has indeed made a bold move in terms of liberating thought. Due to issues such as "inadequate enforcement of penalties" and "lack of penalty strength, some auxiliary officers collecting money without issuing receipts," they have adopted a method akin to that of mobile communication companies, introducing "seasonal packages" and "annual packages" for traffic violations, which resemble the "prepaid packages" offered by mobile communication companies.
According to reports from China National Radio, the traffic police in Leping, Jiangxi province have implemented a system of prepaying fines on a seasonal or yearly basis. Drivers can pay 1900 yuan to avoid fines for a quarter, or 8000 yuan for an entire year without any fines.
The apparent rationale seems solid: the traffic police successfully collect the fines they should, and drivers enjoy practical benefits. You can violate traffic rules daily without being fined daily. It's a win-win situation.
But where does this leave the seriousness of the law, public safety, and the public interest?
The role of the law is not to create profit for enforcement agencies or offenders. Legal punishment is meant to penalize and prevent illegal acts while protecting the legitimate interests of those whose rights have been violated. The measures taken by the Leping traffic police department run counter to the purpose of the law.
On one hand, enforcement agencies are not mobile communication companies, and legal penalties cannot be "prepaid." Any legal penalty must be based on actual offenses that have occurred. We cannot punish people for offenses that have yet to happen. Just because someone commits one violation, it doesn't mean we can assume they will continue to do so. Preemptive penalties are unacceptable.
On the other hand, penalties must be proportionate to the offense (similar to the principle of proportionality between crime and punishment). How an offense should be punished is clearly stipulated by law, which also specifies corresponding penalty ranges based on severity. Within these ranges, enforcement agencies have discretion. However, this discretion cannot exceed the legally defined range, and package-style penalties definitely fall outside this scope.
If the logic used by the Leping traffic police department were applied to legal norms and law enforcement, we would face two dilemmas: First, if people were to be punished merely for the "possibility" of committing an offense, then everyone should be locked up in prison since logically, everyone has the "possibility" of committing a crime (whether intentionally or negligently). Second, if we were to serve three years in jail preemptively, could we then freely commit murder or robbery upon release?
Specifically regarding the measures taken by the Leping traffic police, the issue goes beyond just improper charging.
As previously stated, the seasonal or annual fine packages lack factual and legal grounds, making the collection of fees not an act of law enforcement. After collecting cash from violators, the traffic police department tolerates their traffic violations and ceases to impose penalties, which falls under the scenario outlined in Article 387 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China: "State organs, state-owned companies, enterprises, institutions, and mass organizations soliciting or illegally accepting property from others and seeking benefits for them." If the circumstances are severe, it may constitute the crime of unit bribery. Furthermore, if the traffic police department abandons its duties after receiving a one-time fee—failing to stop traffic violations, maintain traffic order, or protect people's lives and property, leading to significant losses to public property, national interests, or the interests of the people—it would violate Article 397 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China and potentially constitute dereliction of duty.
We do indeed need to continue freeing our minds, enhancing law enforcement efficiency, and adopting more human-centered approaches. But we shouldn’t just seek shortcuts or use the guise of law enforcement to condone illegal activities. Otherwise, society as a whole will descend into chaos.