Abstract:The passive Responsibilism,"nulla poena sine culpa",is a commonly agreed criminal principle and the basic requirement of human rights.Penalty measurement concerns the protection of the human rights of defendants and even the general human rights condition in a country,thus the Point theory of penalty measurement,which is the inevitable conclusion of the passive Responsibilism,should be adopted.According to the Point theory,criminal responsibility determines the toplimit of a punishment.Only under this point can judges consider the necessity of crime prevention.The opinion and its practice of measuring penalty beyond the toplimit decided by responsibility for the necessity of crime prevention or sentencing a heavier punishment under the responsibility—decided penalty (point) for the needs of general prevention not only go against Responsibilism,but also violate defendants' dignity. In fact,synthesis idealism calls for a balance between responsibility—related and prevention —related punishment and judges need to tell which one is influenced by a special plot,because prevention—related plots can be only considered under responsibility—decided penalty (point). The principle of suiting punishment to crime,which is interpreted as heavy punishment fits heavy offense and light punishment fits minor offense,is just for responsibility—decided penalty,not for declaratory penalty.As to declaratory punishment,such principle should be applied asymmetrically. Namely,in accordance with the Point theory,this principle means only that a punishment can not exceed the responsibility—decided toplimit.In this way,although this principle can be interpreted as light punishment fits minor offense,a heavy penalty does not always follow a heavy crime.On the contrary,a light punishment may be sentenced considering minor needs of prevention, even if a heavy crime is accused.To put it bluntly,the principle of suiting punishment to crime permits a sentence under responsibility—decided penalty (point). Neither Current criminal theories guiding discussion on the criterion and method of penalty measurement nor the judicial practice insisting on the normalization of penalty measurement fully consist with Responsibilism.For criminal theory and practice,the highest priority is to carry out Responsibilism in the theory and practice of penalty measurement.

Fundamental Questions about Responsibility

Unveiling Human Rights Protection in China from the Perspective of Criminal Procedure Law

On the Principle of Objective and Considerate Obligation

Criminal Mediation and Traditional Theory of Criminal Responsibility

Responsibilism and the Doctrine of Penalty Measurement

The Principle of Culpability and Foreseeablity in Negligent Crime

On the Establishment of the Principle of Individual Criminal Responsibility in the International Criminal Law

The Theory of the Interactive Relationship Between the Fundamental Constitutional Rights and Civil Rights:From the Perspective of the Right of Personality

Re-thinking of Principle of No Punishment in Doubtful Cases

On the Relativity of the Purpose of Criminal Law

On the question of the role of the principle of justice in the system of principles of criminal punishment

Value Judgments in Criminal Law Interpretation

The Theory of Conduct without Value and Positive General Prevention

Culpability in Criminal Law: A Study on the Blameworthiness

The Development of the New Conduct without Value Theory in China

The Criminal Policy under the Circumstance of the Contemporary Rule of Law

Responsibilitism and Knowledge of Illegality

The Notion of the Criminal Law in Contemporary China

Rethink the basic idea of preventive criminal law

On the Legal Principle of Tolerable Risks

Objective Culpability and the Fate of Reasonable Expectation