KMT parliamentary candidates today questioned whether the blue camp's delivery of bean curd and Guanmiao noodles were investigated and punished, while the green camp's delivery of food was not treated equally. The Supreme People's Procuratorate responded that whether there is election bribery requires a determination of whether there is a bribery intention and consideration of exchanging items for votes. Promotional items with literature and less than 30 yuan that are not enough to influence voting intentions do not constitute election bribery in principle. However, if they are broken into small pieces or sent in batches in an attempt to avoid criminal liability, they may still violate the law.
Lan Ying held a press conference today to question the difference between the blue and green standards of the Ministry of Justice for detecting bribery. Justice Minister Zheng Mingqian said that 30 yuan is only the threshold for detecting bribery. It does not necessarily constitute election bribery when it is reached. However, the Ministry of Justice should make it clear to the outside world on how to determine it, and the standards should be consistent. The Supreme People's Procuratorate pointed out in this regard that the Ministry of Justice's "Examples of Criminal Cases of Obstructing Elections" in 2022 has listed 28 types of behavior that in principle constitute the crime of obstructing elections and 6 types of behavior that do not constitute the crime of vote bribery in principle, and must still be judged by prosecutors based on specific cases.
Regarding the 30 yuan standard, the Supreme People's Procuratorate explained that the listed situations do not constitute vote bribery in principle. They are promotional materials introducing candidates, or promotional materials with a value of less than 30 yuan attached, which are only to deepen voters' impressions and are not enough to affect voting intention. However, even if items such as special garbage bags and small packages of white rice are of minor value, if they are distributed in pieces and circumvented to avoid criminal liability, it is still necessary to collect evidence and comprehensively judge whether they constitute election bribery.
The Supreme People's Procuratorate stated that to identify election bribery, the perpetrator must have the subjective intention to pay bribes, and the bribe or improper benefit paid must objectively have a consideration relationship that requires voters to vote for support or disapproval. Prosecutors must comprehensively weigh the payment object, time, method, price, quantity and other circumstances to determine whether it exceeds social equivalence and whether it is enough to influence or shake voting intentions.
The Supreme People's Procuratorate pointed out that if there is a considerable consideration relationship, even if it is paid in the name of gifts, labor, or participation in campaigning, it will not affect the determination; the consistency of voting bribery is not limited to explicit expressions, and may also be formed tacitly through the actions of both parties and other circumstances. It emphasized that the procuratorial organs strictly adhere to judicial neutrality, and all types of suspected election interference cases are handled separately in accordance with the law; the investigation methods, progress and fact determination of specific cases respect the powers, responsibilities and professional judgment of the prosecutors in charge.
