The suspect’s runny nose was killed. It’s an anecdote and a scandal aptana studio

The suspect in custody a runny nose were killed, is also a scandal in the original title: suspects in custody runny nose were killed, is also a scandal – observers within the prison system, the basic human rights of detainees, the right to life should be protected, this is the bottom line. And because of not wiping the nose was hit dead, crossed the bottom line. In December 21, 2015, Gansu Gangu County Detention Center detainees because Ma Rongyi runny not timely cleaning, by fellow prisoners Xie Mouqiang reprimanded beaten, then pulled into the prison room toilet was 5 detainees brawl death. The day before, a Lanzhou lawyer in the micro-blog name disclosed the above cases. This has been confirmed by the procuratorate of Gangu County, and has been identified as a serious accident caused by serious dereliction of duty of the police. It is understood that there are disciplining police do not perform their duties, illegal use of detainees to manage the detainees; patrol police officers adjust the service arrangements at random, and off duty. He was killed because he didn’t wipe his nose, or he was in the detention house. All know that the prison (including detention center) is a judicial investigation and law enforcement places, justice tend to be realized here, this is the bottom line; the most basic human rights of the detainees, the right to life when guaranteed, the same is the bottom line. But the suspect is easy to be killed, but it exposes the lack of double bottom line. With more than the prison scandal, such as Heilongjiang province Nehe prison Lieyan door ", the Jiangxi police detention center inmates and arrangements stumble female sex trade events, appear this kind of circumstance, often with police duty dereliction of duty related. In this case, there are police who use illegal detainees to manage detainees". This deliberately acquiescence detainees bullying other detainees behavior, is the "jailhouse bully" has been the main reason for manufacturing or indulgent. "Jailhouse bully" was originally not what power, they can dominate the prison room, all kinds of evil, and even kill people, arrogance comes from "prisoner guards assigned prisoners under the mode of borrowing power to do evil. From the judicial perspective, with "jailhouse bully form a community, let the alternative maintenance monitoring room order, is undoubtedly a kind of judicial corruption. Since the 2009 Yunnan "jailhouse bully beat detainees caused the death of" hide and seek "after the incident, the Supervision Bureau of the Ministry of public security and the Supreme Procuratorate jointly launched a" rectification jailhouse bully ". The implementation of the 2010 "public security organs of the people’s police discipline regulations" expressly prohibited, police assigned detainees custody of detainees, otherwise it will be given a demerit or demerits; if the circumstances are serious, demotion or removal from office; if the circumstances are serious, give out punishment. So, banning prisoners is supposed to be a high tension line. Since the law is so clear, so the red line clear, why would the police defy the law? According to the "Regulations" of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on filing standards dereliction of duty and infringement cases, if the Gangu detention center police "in direct violation of public security organs of the people’s police discipline regulations", the so-called "assigned prisoners prisoners", easy to lead a horse was killed, all can be held criminally responsible by the police "dereliction of duty". Considering the bad influence it, the authorities must strict accordance with the law 4

在押嫌犯流鼻涕被打死,是奇闻也是丑闻   原标题:在押嫌犯流鼻涕被打死,是奇闻也是丑闻   ■ 观察家   在监狱系统内,在押人员的最基本人权——生命权亦应得到保障,这是底线。而因未擦鼻涕被打致死,逾越了这底线。   2015年12月21日,甘肃甘谷县看守所的在押人员马容易因流下鼻涕未及时擦拭,遭同监室在押人员谢某强训斥殴打,之后又被拉进监室厕所,遭5名在押人员群殴致死。日前,有兰州律师在微博上实名披露了上述案件。这得到了甘谷县检察院的证实,也被其定性为民警严重失职导致的重大责任事故。据了解,有管教民警不履职,违规使用在押人员管理在押人员;巡控民警随意调整勤务安排,并脱岗。   因未擦鼻涕而被打死,还是发生在看守所里,这堪称奇闻一桩。都知道,监狱(包括看守所)是司法追究、法律执行的场所,正义最终往往要在这里实现,这是底线;在押人员的最基本人权——生命权当得到保障,同样是底线。可在押嫌犯马容易却无端被打死,却暴露了这双重底线的缺失。   跟之前多起狱政丑闻,如黑龙江省讷河监狱“猎艳门”、江西警察安排失足女看守所与犯人性交易事件一样,这类情况出现,往往跟当值警察的失职渎职有关。像该案中,有警察“违规使用在押人员管理在押人员”。而这种故意默许在押人员欺凌其他在押人员的行为,正是“牢头狱霸”得以制造或被纵容的主要缘由。   “牢头狱霸”原本没什么权力,他们之所以能称霸监室,为非作歹,乃至杀害人命,气焰就源于狱警指派“犯人管犯人”模式下的狐假虎威。而从司法角度讲,跟“牢头狱霸”结成共同体,让其替代性地维护监室秩序,无疑是种司法腐败。   自2009年云南发生“牢头狱霸”殴打在押人员致其死亡的“躲猫猫”事件后,公安部监管局和最高检联合开展了“牢头狱霸”的专项整治。2010年开始实施的《公安机关人民警察纪律条令》明确规定,严禁警察指派在押人员看管在押人员,否则将给予记过或者记大过处分;情节较重的,给予降级或者撤职处分;情节严重的,给予开除处分。所以说,禁止“犯人管犯人”本该是一条高压线。既然法令如此明确,红线如此明确,为何还会有警察以身试法?   按最高检《关于渎职侵权犯罪案件立案标准的规定》,若甘谷看守所相关警察直接违反《公安机关人民警察纪律条令》,指派所谓“犯人管犯人”,导致马容易被打死,则完全可按“玩忽职守罪”追究责任民警的刑事责任。虑及这事的恶劣影响,有关方面必须依法严惩,以昭示司法底线的不可逾越。   就该案看,比起黑龙江和江西那两起狱政丑闻的处理,当地在处理速度上有其进步之处:因为前两起案件一开始,责任官员仅是受到行政处分,经过“二次举报”、媒体跟进后,才升级为刑责;这次检方事后就已立案调查涉嫌渎职民警。但有关方面还是要反省,为何这类堪称奇闻的丑闻还会发生,尤其是在该事件发生1年前,当地政法委副书记还带队到甘谷县看守所督察安全管理工作,并对其管理工作予以肯定的情况下?而这类乱象,在基层监狱系统又多大程度地存在?   在一起起狱政丑闻之后,我们希望看到的,不止是个案化的处理,而是从个案反映的现象中去汲取教训,防止其重演。   □季鸿褚(法律学者) 责任编辑:黄睿 SN224相关的主题文章: