On June 14, Jiangxi Province announced the release of the investigation and handling of cheating incidents in relevant test centers for the 2021 college promotion examination. On the evening of June 5, Jiangxi Province’s 2021 junior college entrance examination unified examination subjects appeared suspected to be “leaked questions” and Jiangxi Institute of Engineering test sites have answers on the toilet door during the examination. Jiangxi Provincial Party Committee and Provincial Government attached great importance to it and quickly established investigation and disposal work. Group, public security, education, market supervision and management and other departments immediately launched an investigation. After investigation, during the 2021 college entrance examination in Jiangxi Province, there were serious cheating in the examination centers of Nanchang Institute of Technology and Jiangxi Institute of Technology. There are no leaked questions before the exam, and the exam is valid.
Refining several important information points in the bulletin: 10 minutes after the start of the test on the morning of June 5th, Luo, the invigilator at the test center, used his mobile phone to secretly take pictures of the test questions and sent them to Xu, the head of admissions of Runzhilin, and Xu organized 4 people. The part-time staff of the company made the answer and sent it to Luo Mou and Xu Mouhao, the person in charge of Beiwei Company, and Xu Mouhao transferred it to Zhou Moujie, the person in charge of Beiwei Company, who sent it to the “2020 Runzhi Lin Group”, There are 81 candidates in this group who participated in the college entrance examination this year. According to this fact, Luo, Xu, Zhou and others are suspected of organizing exam cheating. The Jiangxi Provincial Education Examination Institute reviewed the video surveillance video of the examination room where the 81 candidates were located, and compared and analyzed the answer papers. No abnormalities in the examination room were found, and no plagiarism of the answers in the pictures of the “leaked questions” posted on the Internet was found. The public security organs have discovered clues that Luo organized 3 other candidates to cheat. On the morning of June 5th, Leung, the staff of Decheng Education Company, instructed Zhang Mousha and Chen (A), the invigilators of the test center, to take pictures of the test questions during the invigilation period and send back the answers to the test questions. After receiving the answer, Liang immediately forwarded it to the admissions teacher, and finally forwarded it to the student Chen (Department Admissions Assistant). Chen transcribed the answer on the door panel of the toilet in the test center. After analyzing the answer papers, it was found that the answers to the test questions of 151 candidates at the test center were consistent with the answers on the door panel. The subject marking experts determined that the answers were the same and dealt with violations. “Measures for the Handling of Violations of National Education Examinations” Article 7 Educational examination institutions and examination staff discover any of the following behaviors during the examination or after the examination, it shall be determined that the relevant examinee has cheated in the examination: (2) Marking papers In the process, it was determined that the answer was the same; 5. Regarding the teacher Xu Mouxin’s claim that he paid a package of 26,000 yuan to pass the college entrance examination, after investigation, the teacher was suspected of fraud. In a case of undergraduate examination, several suspects who organized cheating and fraud on the examination were brought out, which is shocking! Attached is the relevant legal issues concerning the crime of cheating in organizing examinations: q1 What is the crime of organizing cheating in examinations? In 2015, Article 25 of my country’s Criminal Law Amendment (9) added a new article as one of Article 284 of the Criminal Law: Organizing cheating in the national examination prescribed by the law shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention, and A fine or a fine shall be imposed; if the circumstances are serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years, and shall also be fined. Whoever provides cheating equipment or other assistance for others to commit the crimes mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph. Anyone who illegally sells or provides the test questions and answers specified in the first paragraph to others for the purpose of cheating in the exam shall be punished in accordance with the provisions in the first paragraph. Anyone who substitutes for another person or allows another person to take the examination specified in the first paragraph shall be sentenced to criminal detention or control, and a fine or a fine shall be imposed concurrently or solely. The first paragraph stipulates the crime of organizing cheating in examinations, that is, organizing cheating in national examinations stipulated by law. The crime is a behavioral crime, the subject of the crime is a general subject, and the subjective aspect is intentional. Whether the cheating is successful does not affect the conviction of the crime and the determination of its immediate completion. In other words, the intentional organization of cheating in the national examination prescribed by the law constitutes the crime, and shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention, concurrently or solely with a fine; if the circumstances are serious and the result is aggravated offense, the penalty shall be more than three years and seven years. The following fixed-term imprisonment and fines. q2 Is the college entrance examination a national examination required by law? Article 1 of the “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Criminal Cases such as Organizing Exams and Cheating” stipulates that the following examinations are “national examinations prescribed by law”: (1) General higher education entrance examinations, graduate enrollment National education examinations such as examinations, higher education self-study examinations, adult college admissions examinations; (2) Central and local civil servant recruitment examinations; (3) National unified legal professional qualification examination, national teacher qualification examination, unified national examination for certified public accountants, accounting majors Technical qualification examination, asset appraisal qualification examination, physician qualification examination, licensed pharmacist professional qualification examination, registered architect examination, construction engineer qualification examination and other professional and technical qualification examinations; (4) Others shall be determined by the central or local authorities and the industry in accordance with the law. Organized national examinations. We know that there are two types of college promotion: the first type is general higher education (universal enrollment), and the test subjects are limited to full-time college graduates. The second category is the undergraduate promotion of adult higher education. Among them, the first category belongs to the entrance examination for ordinary colleges and universities, and the second category belongs to the entrance examination for adult colleges and universities, both of which belong to the national examinations stipulated by law. q3 In this case, if the relevant circumstances of cheating in the organized examination are true, does it belong to the “serious circumstances”? First of all, it needs to be clarified that the examination involved in this case is the college entrance examination for ordinary colleges and universities in Jiangxi Province, which belongs to the “regular college enrollment examination.” Article 2 of the “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Criminal Cases such as Organizing Examination Cheating” stipulates that organizing examination cheating in the general college admissions examinations, postgraduate admissions examinations, and civil servant recruitment examinations; organization Those who cheated more than 30 times are considered “serious circumstances.” Regarding the considerations behind this provision, please refer to the interpretation by Jiang Qibo, Director of the Research Office of the Supreme People’s Court: According to legal provisions and combined with judicial practice, Article 2 of the “Interpretation” sets nine criteria for determining the “serious circumstances” of the crime of cheating in organizing examinations. It is clearly stipulated that it generally involves the following six aspects: One is the type of examination. General college admissions examinations, postgraduate admissions examinations, and civil servant recruitment examinations have a high degree of social attention, great influence and wide coverage. Therefore, the “Interpretation” directly stipulates that the organization of cheating in these three types of examinations is “serious.” The second is behavioral consequences. The “Explanation” clearly stipulates that the test will be postponed, cancelled, or used as alternate test questions as “serious circumstances.” The third is the subject of behavior. Examination staff organized cheating in examinations in violation of their responsibilities, and the subjective malignancy was even greater, so the “Interpretation” stipulated it as “serious circumstances.” The fourth is the geographical scope. Organizing candidates to cheat across provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government is very harmful, so the “Interpretation” stipulates it as “serious circumstances.” The fifth is the quantity standard. The “Explanation” will organize multiple cheating on exams, organize more than 30 people to cheat, and provide more than 50 pieces of cheating equipment as “serious circumstances.” Sixth, illegal income. From the perspective of judicial practice, according to the different examinations involved, the amount of illegal income obtained by organizing examination cheating or providing cheating equipment and other assistance varies greatly. Based on the consideration of severely punishing the crime of cheating in organizing examinations, the “Interpretation” stipulates that the illegal income is more than 300,000 yuan as “serious circumstances.” In other words, if the case is verified, whether it is in terms of the type of examination or the number of organizations, the case is very likely to be “serious.”