非法狩猎罪保护对象应包括国家重点保护的珍贵濒危野生动物

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of biodiversity protection in China, highlighting the legal challenges and discrepancies in the application of laws related to the protection of endangered species and illegal hunting [1][2]. Legal Framework - China's Criminal Law specifies two offenses related to biodiversity: the crime of harming precious and endangered wildlife and the crime of illegal hunting, with specific legal definitions and conditions for each [1][2]. - The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate established standards for prosecution, stating that the value of endangered species must exceed 20,000 yuan for prosecution under the first offense, while the value for illegal hunting must exceed 10,000 yuan [2]. Discrepancies in Legal Interpretation - There are two main interpretations regarding the protection objects of the two offenses: one denies overlap, suggesting that illegal hunting only applies to non-endangered species, while the other affirms that it includes endangered species [3][4]. - The lack of clarity in the legal definitions leads to challenges in prosecuting cases, particularly in instances involving various species of wild birds, where the public may not be aware of the protection status [2][3]. Judicial Implications - The principle of proportionality in sentencing is highlighted, where individuals may escape prosecution for hunting endangered species if the value does not meet the threshold, while others may face prosecution for hunting non-endangered species, leading to potential public discontent [4][5]. - The article argues for a more inclusive interpretation of the law to ensure that both offenses can apply to overlapping categories of wildlife, thereby enhancing legal consistency and public understanding [5][6]. Legislative History - The evolution of laws regarding illegal hunting and the protection of endangered species is traced back to 1979, with significant amendments made to strengthen protections over the years, indicating a legislative intent to provide comprehensive protection for wildlife [5][6].