The Attribution Dilemma and Judgement Logic for Identifying Causation in Economic Crimes
Zhu Qi-wei1,2
1. School of Law Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, 201306; 2. the Postdoctoral Station of East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, 200042
Abstract：The question of the identification of causation in economic crimes has long been overlooked. Although the conditional theory, theory of adequate causation, and objective imputation theory demonstrate limitations in this context, these theoretical shortcomings merely reflect superficial causes of causal confusion, which can be resolved by selectively applying different causation theories based on typological application. The root causes lie in three logical fallacies in judicial identification. First, the overextension of presumptive reasoning leads to circular inference, presuming both the existence of subjective elements and the establishment of causality. Second, arbitrary fragmentation and aggregation of causal chains leads to the conflation of modifying causes with associative causes. Third, there is an internal contradiction in asserting a distinction between normative evaluation and factual identification, while simultaneously allowing normative standards to selectively filter factual elements, thereby undermining the objective basis for causal attribution. The proper logic for identifying causation in economic crimes should be based on the unity of the legal order, and rigorously delimit perpetrating acts for criminal evaluation, and exclude those grounded in civil rights, those that merely superficially resemble civil entitlements without embodying criminal unlawfulness, and those that can be avoided through lawful alternatives by others. On this basis, a typological causation model should be constructed to distinguish modifying causes from associative ones, enabling precise evaluation of each act's causal contribution and preventing erroneous causal attribution.
2025, Vol. 42 
粤公网安备44030502007936号