news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

text│dongdongqiang

a recent court verdict in a traffic accident case has attracted attention and been widely recognized by netizens. first, the incident just happened to "take advantage of" the popularity of the case of a boy in hebei who was crushed to death while riding a bicycle; second, the verdict reflects the principle of attribution of responsibility that "whoever is at fault shall be held responsible", which is in line with the general public's perception.

zhou ran a red light while crossing the road at the crosswalk on the east side of the intersection of wuwei road and hongmian road in putuo district, shanghai, and collided with lin, who was riding an electric bicycle. lin and his bicycle fell into the opposite motorway. at this time, the motorway at the opposite intersection turned green, and liu's car started to dodge in time, causing lin to be run over by the vehicle. zhou fled the scene, and lin was injured and died.

the traffic accident was clearly identified. zhou ran a red light in the crosswalk and was primarily responsible; lin was speeding on an electric bicycle on the road and was secondarily responsible; liu was driving his car normally when the light was green and did not need to bear any responsibility for the accident.

after trial, the court held that zhou's crime of causing a traffic accident was clear and the evidence was sufficient. moreover, zhou left the scene quickly after the accident, which was considered fleeing after the traffic accident, which was a statutory aggravating circumstance. he confessed truthfully after voluntarily turning himself in, which was considered as surrendering himself, and he could be given a lighter punishment according to law. therefore, zhou was sentenced to two years and six months in prison for the crime of causing a traffic accident.

this legal judgment clarifies a misunderstanding that it is not only motor vehicle drivers who can commit traffic accident crimes. non-motor vehicle drivers and pedestrians who participate in traffic and violate the road traffic safety law and cause traffic accidents may also be suspected of traffic accident crimes. this case reminds us that whether we are pedestrians, motor vehicle drivers or non-motor vehicle drivers, we must abide by road traffic rules. life is precious.

protecting the weak and putting people first are the major principles for the formulation and implementation of road traffic regulations. compared with motor vehicles, pedestrians and non-motor vehicle drivers are at a disadvantage in terms of road rights. based on the spirit of humanity, generally speaking, motor vehicles should bear greater safety responsibilities, which does not mean that pedestrians and non-motor vehicles do not have to bear responsibilities. in judicial trials, it is even more impossible for the weaker ones to be right.

whoever is at fault is responsible, and this fault refers to the "cause" that caused the "effect". lin was hit and killed by driver liu, but the real cause was zhou's running a red light. this is a "causal" relationship in the sense of criminal law, so the responsibility should be borne by zhou, not whoever is responsible for the hit and kill. this judgment reflects the original intention of the rule of law and is in line with the cognition of most people.

the significance of this judicial decision is that it can help the public better establish the rule awareness that “whoever is wrong is responsible” rather than “whoever is weaker is right”.