There＇ re many problems in the investigation of the occupational crime committed by members at the rural grass- roots level organizations. The legislative explanation differentiates between I~rural affairs＂ and ~＂public affairs＂, which is not suit- able for the real cases and results in the jurisdiction contradiction. The legislative explanation neither lists the villager group leader, village accountant and cashier as the official of public affairs, nor stipulates that the members at the rural grass-roots level organiza- tions can become the subjects of criminal malfeasance. These problems have impeded the fights against the occupational crime at the rural grass-roots level organizations. In order to solve the related applicable law problem, the ＂2000 legislative explanation＂ needs to be modified or cancelled, and the differentiation between ＂rural affairs＂ and ＂public affairs＂ to be abandoned. Or , the procuratorate should be entitled with more comprehensive investigation power, and the villager group leader, village accountant and cashier should be listed as the members of the ＂rural grass-roots level organizations＂ in the legislative explanation, and the members at the rural grass-roots level organizations can become the subjects of criminal malfeasance.%查处农村基层组织人员职务犯罪遇到的问题较多，立法解释划分“村务”与“公务”，不符合查处案件的实际，导致出现案件管辖矛盾；立法解释未将村民小组长和村会计、出纳列为执行公务的主体，未规定农村基层组织人员可成为渎职罪主体，这些问题的存在，不利于对农村基层组织人员职务犯罪的打击。为解决农村基层组织人员职务犯罪法律适用问题，应修改或者取消“2000立法解释”，无须划分“村务”与“公务”，否则，就应赋予检察机关以相对宽泛的机动侦查权，将村民小组长、村会计、出纳归入立法解释中所指的“农村基层组织人员”，规定农村基层组织人员也可成为渎职罪的主体。
展开▼
