“交通肇事逃逸”责任认定实务问题研究

在我国道路交通事故中,交通肇事逃逸事故所占比重一直较高。交通肇事逃逸行为使受害者得不到及时救助而处于危险境地,更有甚者因失去救助机会而死亡。交通事故因现场证据的变动或消失而难以得到准确的认定和处理,各地出台的条例对逃逸事故认定的极端性以及出现同一类型的交通肇事逃逸事故因发生的辖区不同而出现截然不同的处理结果等问题都是导致受害者家属得不到及时赔偿而不断信访投诉的原因。结合自身多年处理交通事故的实践经验,研究分析了"交通肇事逃逸"事故责任认定现存的缺陷,提出了完善"交通肇事逃逸"事故责任认定的建议和意见。

A Study on the Practice of Responsibility Determination in the Case of Escaping after Causing Traffic Accident

With a high rate of incidence, traffic accidents are paid much attention to both in practice and in laws and regulations. Among the road traffic accidents in China, absconds have been relatively high in proportion, which leaves victims of the accidents to lose timely assistance and in danger; the failure of duly compensation to families of the victims leads to petition letters or complaints ; and it is extremely hard to collect , affirm and treat evidences because of the changes or the disappearance of scenes. What is worse, some perpetrators even dump the victims in remote areas far away from the scenes, which leads the victims to die out due to the loss of opportunities for them to obtain duly help, and therefore such abscond behaviors are generally fiercely condemned by the whole society. In order to curb the upward momentum of abscond behaviors and to strengthen the dynamics of penalties, the Road Traffic Safety Regulations of Guangdong Province stipulate that the party to abscond an accident shall bear full responsibilities for the accident; but, the party to abscond an accident shall bear main responsibility if he/she can produce evidence that the other party is also at fault. The above provisions of the accident about the abscond responsibilities and the upper extreme of the law have brought about some conflicts along with other issues, causing considerable dissents at all levels of the society. By combining years of experience in dealing roads accidents with reference to the domestic studies related to the abscond behaviors from the traffic accidents, this paper analyzes the existing .deficiencies in identifying abscond responsibilities, and offers some suggestions for improving the current practice, the purpose of which is to unify the standard of law enforcement, normalize the enforcement and to protect the clients＇ legal rights.