日批在线视频_内射毛片内射国产夫妻_亚洲三级小视频_在线观看亚洲大片短视频_女性向h片资源在线观看_亚洲最大网

A decree passed by China's top judicial bodies will protect human rights and guard against their infringement.

The 18-clause judicial interpretation, forced by the outbreak of SARS, was recently handed down by the Supreme People's Procuratorate and Supreme People's Court.

It says intentionally spreading sudden contagious disease pathogens that endanger public security or lead to serious personal injury, death or the heavy loss of public or private property, will be punishable by up to life in prison or the death penalty.

"The aim of issuing such a judicial interpretation is to protect human rights, which conforms with the International Covenant on Human Rights," said Hu Yunteng with the Supreme People's Court.

During an on-line discussion about the decree, which took effect on Thursday, he said it aimed to provide legal guarantees to stop the further spread of SARS and to control the epidemic.

"The spread of SARS has imposed a serious threat on the human rights of the Chinese people," Hu said.

The lower end of punishment for breaking the new decree, a minimum of 10 years' jail for having caused serious harm, death or loss of property, ranks it with committing arson, poisoning people or detonating explosives, under China's current Criminal Law.

Zhao Tianhong with the China University of Political Science and Law, said: "I do not think the contents of the judicial interpretation have breached the country's Criminal Law."

Judicial interpretations, issued by the Supreme People's Court and Supreme People's Procuratorate after being approved by special committees in the two departments, provide details on the basis of the laws and act as guidelines for interpretations during trials.

However, some law experts say the courts should be cautious in applying the clause.

"SARS is a new disease about which doctors and researchers still have many questions, including the way the disease has spread," said Zhang Wen, a law professor with Peking University, adding judges should make sure the accused had spread the disease intentionally out of ill will and that their actions had led to the infection of many people when handing down a guilty verdict.