After the broadcast of the Chinese New Year film "Article 20", it once again stimulated the widespread attention and discussion of the "legitimate defense" clause of Article 20 of the Criminal Law, and the Supreme People's Procuratorate issued film reviews such as "The law is not cold logic", "Wake up the sleeping '20 Articles'", "Dare to be a good person", and the Supreme People's Court also followed up with the film review "The law cannot bow to the lawless", giving high praise and affirmation to the film "Article 20" directed by Zhang Yimou, which actually conveyed the message of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, The SPC attaches great importance to and encourages positive signals of legitimate self-defense and courageous actions.
As a criminal defense lawyer, I can say without hesitation that typical cases such as the Shandong Mother Humiliation Case and the Kunshan Anti-Homicide Case have promoted the promulgation of the Guiding Opinions on the Lawful Application of the Legitimate Defense System by the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security (August 28, 2020). I think that Wang Yongqiang's stabbing of Liu Wenjing to death in the film was finally determined to be justified defense, which may be due to the need for artistic creation, but judicial practice is not artistic creation, and there are very few cases in which Article 20 of the Criminal Law can really be applied. According to the statistics of scholars, among all the samples of evaluation not-guilty judgments obtained from the judgment document network, the proportion of cases in which the cause of guilt is "justified defense" is very low, and the more reasons for guilt are "proviso" and "other reasons". However, the positive influence of the movie "Article 20" must not be underestimated, triggering the interpretation of Article 20 of the Criminal Law by legal and non-legal people on the whole network.
Criminal cases involve the life, liberty, property and other major interests of others, and different interpretations of Article 20 of the Criminal Law will have two completely different results, the positive result is innocence, and the defender is a heroic image; The negative result is a crime, and the defender is the criminal referred to by Qianfu. There is a world of difference between positive and negative, which not only affects the fate of one person, but also affects the fate of the entire family, and even affects the fate of several generations, just as Prosecutor Han Ming said, "We are not handling a case, but someone else's life."
I hope to take the opportunity of the movie "Article 20" to interpret the application of Article 20 of the Criminal Law "legitimate defense" and its significance to the rule of law.
I. The specific content of Article 20 of the Criminal Law
Article 20 of the Criminal Law has a total of three paragraphs, the first of which is justified defense, which stipulates that "where an act taken to stop an unlawful infringement is taken in order to protect the state, the public interest, the person, property and other rights of oneself or others from an ongoing unlawful infringement, and causes damage to the unlawful infringer, it is justified defense and does not bear criminal responsibility."
The second paragraph, on excessive defense, stipulates that "where legitimate defense clearly exceeds the necessary limit and causes major harm, criminal responsibility shall be borne, but punishment shall be reduced or waived".
The third paragraph is unlimited defense or special defense, which stipulates that "a person who is engaged in a crime, murder, robbery, kidnapping, or other violent crimes that seriously endanger personal safety, and takes defensive acts, causing an unlawful infringer, is not considered to be in excessive defense and does not bear criminal responsibility."
In the movie "Article 20", the first paragraph of Article 20 of the Criminal Law applies to the case of Wang Yongqiang.
2. The constituent conditions of legitimate defense
According to the provisions of Article 20 of the Criminal Law and the theory of criminal law, in judicial practice, it is necessary to comprehensively consider the conditions of cause, intent, time, limit, and object to determine the establishment of legitimate defense. The so-called causal condition is that there must be an unlawful offense, and it should be noted that unlawful aggression includes both criminal acts and ordinary illegal acts. This includes not only the violation of the rights to life and health, but also the infringement of the property rights of the State and individuals. The condition of intent is to protect the State, the public interest, the person, property and other rights of the person or others from an ongoing wrongful infringement. Of course, defensive provocation does not constitute legitimate defense, for example, deliberately provoking the other party to attack oneself with verbal stimulation and then counterattacking cannot constitute legitimate defense, because there is no defensive intent. The temporal condition is the ongoing wrongful infringement. The limit condition is that the necessary limit is not significantly exceeded. The object condition is that it can only be defended against the wrongdoer.
IIIIn judicial practice, yesJust in self-defenseIdentificationThe difficulties and pain points are mainly the grasp of time conditions and limit conditions
1. GraspTime conditionsThe main thing to look at is ".wrongful infringement from the beginning to the end".Question
In the movie "Article 20", Wang Yongqiang and Hao Xiuping borrowed a loan shark from Liu Wenjing's family in order to treat their disabled daughter, and Liu Wenjing forcibly locked Wang Yongqiang in the name of debt collection, almost in person** Hao Xiuping, and then in person** Wang Yongqiang, saying that he had a one-time relationship with Hao Xiuping to deduct 200 yuan in debt, and walked away after speaking. Wang Yongqiang broke free from the rope and Liu Wenjing fought desperately, Liu Wenjing, as a strong party, did not expect Wang Yongqiang to dare to call with himself, so he went to the car to get a knife to end Wang Yongqiang, Wang Yongqiang reflexively returned to the yard, picked up scissors and chased Liu Wenjing who had climbed on the car to find a knife, and stabbed Liu Wenjing 26 times with scissors in the process of fighting, Liu Wenjing died after rescue.
The public security organs transferred Wang Yongqiang to the procuratorate for review and prosecution on suspicion of intentional injury, and the procuratorate discussed it at the meeting, and the vast majority of prosecutors believed that Liu Wenjing's illegal infringement of Hao Xiuping had ended, and Wang Yongqiang's fight with Liu Wenjing was an after-the-fact defense, so they believed that Wang Yongqiang constituted the crime of intentional injury. Only the presiding prosecutor, Lu Lingling, believed that Wang Yongqiang was justified in self-defense, because Wang Yongqiang confessed that "Liu Wenjing said that he took a knife in the car", and believed that the illegal infringement faced by Wang Yongqiang had not yet ended, and Wang Yongqiang's stabbing of Liu Wenjing with scissors was justified defense. Therefore, whether there was really a knife in the car has become the key physical evidence to judge whether Liu Wenjing's illegal infringement has ended, and Lu Lingling, as the lead prosecutor, has the initiative to characterize the case to a certain extent, and twice returned to ask the investigating agency to find the whereabouts of the knife. After twists and turns in the storyline, the knife was finally found, and Wang Yongqiang was recognized as legitimate defense.
In terms of the reasons for Wang Yongqiang's determination of justifiable defense in the film "Article 20", I may have a different understanding from many legal people.
Most people believe that if Wang Yongqiang had not been locked, then when Liu Wenjing started to carry out ** against Hao Xiuping, Wang Yongqiang could carry out unlimited defense in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 20 of the Criminal Law, directly causing Liu Wenjing to die, and did not need to bear any criminal responsibility. I couldn't agree more.
But the actual situation is that when Liu Wenjing violated Hao Xiuping, Wang Yongqiang was chained by Liu Wenjing and could not stop the illegal infringement. So after Liu Wenjing's adultery against Hao Xiuping is over, does it mean that the illegal infringement has ended? This involves the definition of the end of the unlawful infringement, so whose standard is the key to judging whether the unlawful infringement has ended, whether to consider it from the perspective of Wang Yongqiang or from the perspective of a calm and rational judicial officer?
Article 6 of the Guiding Opinions on the Lawful Application of the Justified Defense System stipulates that "where an unlawful offense has already become a real and imminent danger, it shall be deemed that the unlawful offense has already begun; Where the unlawful offense is temporarily interrupted or temporarily stopped, but there is still a realistic possibility that the unlawful offender will continue to carry out the offense, it shall be found that the unlawful offense is still ongoing; ......Where the unlawful offender has truly lost the capacity to infringe or has truly given up the violation, it shall be found that the unlawful infringement has ended. As to whether the unlawful offense has begun or ended, a reasonable judgment shall be made in accordance with law based on the circumstances in which the defender was in the defense, and in accordance with the general understanding of the public, and the defender must not be demanded. Where defenders have a misunderstanding of whether the unlawful offense has begun or ended due to panic, nervousness, or other such factors, they shall be appropriately handled in accordance with law in accordance with the principle of unity of subjectivity and objectivity. ”
According to the practice of judicial practice in the past, most judgments are made from the perspective of judicial personnel, that is, judicial personnel examine the defender's behavior from the perspective of "God's perspective" or "hindsight", and think that what should be done and what should not be done, which is obviously too strict on the defender, so that the cases that should have been determined according to legitimate defense are found to be the crimes of intentional injury and intentional homicide. The "Guiding Opinions" emphasize that judicial personnel should not judge from the "perspective of God", but should bring judicial personnel into the situation of the defender and how to deal with it.
Wang Yongqiang's wife was not only provoked, stimulated, and insulted by Liu Wenjing, how could Wang Yongqiang be indifferent after unlocking at this time? Wang Yongqiang rushed out of the gate and tore Liu Wenjing apart, which is completely a normal person's performance. In the process of tearing, Liu Wenjing said that he was going to the car to get a knife, I think in this situation, there is no need to consider whether Liu Wenjing's illegal infringement of Hao Xiuping has ended, it can be considered that Liu Wenjing wants to carry out a new and urgent illegal infringement on Wang Yongqiang, and it should be determined that Liu Wenjing's illegal infringement has begun and is ongoing and has not yet ended.
The film "Article 20" pins a large part of Wang Yongqiang's justified defense determination on the search for knives, but I think that whether Liu Wenjing really has a knife or whether he finally finds a knife or not does not affect the determination of Wang Yongqiang's legitimate defense.
Assuming that the investigative agency did not find the knife mentioned by Liu Wenjing in the end, could Wang Yongqiang not be able to constitute legitimate defense? Of course not, we must also bring ourselves into the situation where Wang Yongqiang is, Liu Wenjing said during the fight that he would go to the car to get the knife, and after speaking, he ran in the direction of the car. Under the circumstances, could Wang Yongqiang calmly analyze or realize that Liu Wenjing did not have a knife at all, and it was Liu Wenjing who was scaring himself? According to the general perception of the public, combined with Liu Wenjing's usual bandit style, we believe what Liu Wenjing said with all reason, not to mention that Liu Wenjing really ran to his car and opened the door. If Liu Wenjing was just a scare, Liu Wenjing would not necessarily run to his car, so I think that even if the investigating agency did not find the knife in the end, it can still be determined that Wang Yongqiang constituted legitimate defense.
2. GraspLimit condition cannotExcessiveDemanding that defenders do it appropriately.
Many people believe that even if Wang Yongqiang meets the time requirements for legitimate defense, he may exceed the limit conditions, so there were many voices of excessive defense at the hearing. These people who hold the voice of excessive defense believe that Wang Yongqiang stabbed Liu Wenjing and should have stopped stabbing Liu Wenjing when he lost his ability to infringe, but Wang Yongqiang stabbed Liu Wenjing as many as 26 times with scissors, which eventually caused the serious consequences of Liu Wenjing's death.
We say that those who hold this view are in fact being overly demanding of defenders from the "perspective of God." Article 12 of the Guiding Opinions stipulates that "......Whether the defense "clearly exceeds the necessary limit" shall be judged based on the nature, means, intensity, and degree of harm of the unlawful offense, as well as the timing, means, intensity, and harmful consequences of the defense, and other circumstances, considering the balance of forces between the two sides, based on the circumstances in which the defender was in the defense, and in consideration of the general understanding of the public. In judging the degree of harm caused by an unlawful offense, it is necessary to consider not only the harm already caused, but also the imminent danger and actual possibility of causing further harm. The defender should not be required to respond in a manner and intensity that is substantially equivalent to that of the unlawful offense. If, through comprehensive consideration, there is a huge disparity between the defensive act and the unlawful offense, or where it is clearly excessive, it shall be found that the defense clearly exceeds the necessary limit."
It can be seen that the Guiding Opinions require judicial personnel to also bring themselves into the context of the defender to make judgments when grasping the limits. Imagine, under the circumstances at that time, if Wang Yongqiang was asked to judge how many stabs he could make Liu Wenjing lose his ability to infringe, it would undoubtedly be too demanding of Wang Yongqiang, so the number of stabs 26 times or the number of stabs should not be the basis for judging whether Wang Yongqiang obviously exceeded the necessary limit.
Fourth, "luck" should not beNor can it become judicial practiceConditions for the correct application of article 20 of the Criminal Law
One of the main lines of the movie "Article 20" is the case of Wang Yongqiang, as well as the case of bus driver Zhang Guisheng and the case of prosecutor Han Ming's son Han Yuchen to prevent campus bullying and act bravely.
There is no doubt that Wang Yongqiang is lucky, because there are too many accidental factors that make Wang Yongqiang a lucky one. After qualitative controversy, pressure from the victim's family, and concern from higher-level leaders, Deputy Procurator General Tian in charge of the case replaced Lu Lingling, the lead prosecutor in Wang Yongqiang's case, with Han Ming, who was actually a procurator who was wise enough to protect himself and did not have much responsibility. If there is no accident on the way to petition? If Zhang Guisheng's daughter hadn't questioned Han Ming, what would you do if you were a bus driver? What if Hao Xiuping hadn't committed suicide by jumping off a building? If there was no conversation with Prosecutor Lu Lingling? If there is no Han Yuchen to ask Han Ming, is it wrong to be brave? If this series of events had not touched Han Ming, would Han Ming have changed his opinion on Wang Yongqiang's case? I'm afraid that every viewer has no bottom in their psychology. Moreover, the prototype of Wang Yongqiang's case should be the Shandong mother humiliation case and the Kunshan anti-homicide case, the biggest credit of these two cases I think is that the attention and the defender's strong defense have attracted great attention from the higher authorities and changed the trend of the case.
Of course, there are too many extra-case factors that affect the application of justifiable defense in judicial practice, especially in cases where death is caused by defensive acts, in addition to the direction of investigation and evidence collection by the investigative organs, which will make it difficult to determine justifiable defense, judicial personnel also have to face pressure from the victim's family, what to besiege the case-handling unit, what to petition everywhere, plus the influence of erroneous judicial inertia such as "whoever can make trouble is justified, whoever has been killed or injured is justified", "the crying doll has milk", etc. Even if a procurator finds that it is justified defense and does not prosecute, the procurator and public security investigators who made the decision to approve the arrest may be affected to varying degrees, so the judicial organs' reluctance to determine justified defense or their unwillingness to take the initiative to determine justified defense is also an important factor.
For example, in 2018, I was in the intentional injury case of Zhang in Longyan City, Fujian Province, Zhang and the victim were half-brothers, but they did not know each other, one day Zhang and his mother returned to their home and found that the door was pried, so they reported the case. When the police were inspecting the scene, the victim took the opportunity to enter Zhang's house and held an iron rod to Zhang's head, which was then torn and pulled away by the police. Subsequently, the victim called ** and gathered everyone to surround Zhang and his mother in their home. In the course of the confrontation between the two sides, the victim gathered people smashed a stool at Zhang's mother, and Zhang's mother fell to the ground, and at the same time the victim also rushed to the balcony with a stick and smashed down on Zhang's head, Zhang raised his left arm to parry, and slashed the victim's left arm with a knife in his right hand. Later, Zhang was beaten by the victim's group of people until he was pulled away by the police. The victim's injuries were assessed as minor injuries of the second degree. At that time, I proposed that the victim illegally invaded Zhang's house and armed Zhang**, and also summoned dozens of people to surround Zhang's mother and son in the room, Zhang's mother and son faced imminent and dangerous illegal violations, and took the lead in attacking Zhang's mother and son, and Zhang took the opportunity to cut the victim into minor injuries, which met the composition of legitimate defense. However, the procuratorate and the court found that Zhang and the victim were beating each other, and that the defender mainly "ran away" in the face of illegal infringement, and as long as he "resisted", it was found to be a misdirection of "mutual assault". In fact, this case reflects the problem of difficulty in determining legitimate defense due to the fear of holding investigators and prosecutors accountable.
Therefore, it is difficult for a defender in judicial practice to be as lucky as Wang Yongqiang, who dares to guarantee that he can meet a prosecutor like Lu Lingling? What's more, the pressure on prosecutors and judges to try cases is very high, how can they put so much energy into handling it like Wang Yongqiang's case? Isn't Zhang Guisheng's case in the film as lucky as Wang Yongqiang?
Parties cannot gamble on "luck", defense lawyers cannot expect "luck", and only by daring to put forward correct opinions to the case-handling unit can they promote the correct application of article 20 of the Criminal Law by the case-handling personnel.
FiveJudicial officersSpontaneous change of philosophy withCourageThe judicial responsibility isReally apply it rightArticle 20 of the Criminal Law is an indispensable condition
I think that in the movie "Article 20", only Prosecutor Lu Lingling did it right, for which Lu Lingling offended the investigators, offended the leadership, and was even suspended for reflection, paying a certain price for the right thing. However, how many Lu Linglings are there in reality? After procurator Han Ming presided over the case, he still curried favor with the leaders, and even listed so many cases in one breath to prove that the prosecution of Wang Yongqiang for the crime of intentional injury was "wise to protect his life". In the end, he changed Prosecutor Han Ming's understanding because he had experienced too many changes himself, so Han Ming's change of concept was actually passive and not spontaneous, so I think Wang Yongqiang's "luck" is also very thrilling.
Of course, we look forward to more and more prosecutors with judicial responsibilities like Prosecutor Lu Lingling and Prosecutor Han Ming after changing their concepts, and we also expect more and more prosecutors to change their concepts and have the courage to take on judicial responsibilities. I think that the conceptual change and judicial responsibility of prosecutors and judges need to be affirmed and promoted by top-level designers, so that judicial personnel can truly realize that "what we handle is not a case, but someone else's life", just like the film review of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, "the law is not cold logic", and the case should not be affected by the cold logic. Judicial personnel should put themselves in the shoes of defending people, establish courage and responsibility, and make judicial judgments that conform to common sense and common sense and conform to the simplicity of the people, so as to truly interpret the rule of law expectation of "letting the people feel fairness and justice in every judicial case".
6. Defense lawyersIt should be properly applied as an auxiliary judicial officerArticle 20 of the Criminal LawThe main promoter
The film "Article 20" perfectly interprets the touching story of how the prosecutor perseveres, how to eliminate interference, and correctly applies Article 20 of the Criminal Law from an artistic point of view. However, it is undeniable that artistic creation is the same as judicial practice, but it cannot be equated with judicial practice, and the reality of the application of Article 20 of the Criminal Law in judicial practice is still relatively cruel, whether it is the Shandong mother humiliation case or the Kunshan anti-homicide case, I think the disclosure of ** has aroused widespread attention and the persistence of the defense lawyer has played a vital role in the case. However, not every defense case can be captured, and not all defense cases are interested in every defense case. Although Wang Yongqiang does not have a defender in the film "Article 20", it may be necessary for artistic creation to highlight the prosecutor's image of justice. But I don't think that's the case in judicial practice, we can't expect every case to be paid attention to, and we can't expect every case to meet a prosecutor like Lu Lingling, in practice, defense lawyers must not be absent, family members can entrust lawyers to defend if they have the financial ability, and countries that do not have the financial ability must also appoint lawyers to defend.
Artistic creation can portray a prosecutor as a fair and perfect image, but the Criminal Procedure Law determines that the duty of a prosecutor is mainly to exercise the prosecution function on behalf of the state, and the second is the supervisory function to protect the innocent from prosecution, so the main focus of the prosecutor is still on the review of incriminating evidence, and it is difficult for a prosecutor like Lu Lingling to insist on innocent evidence.
Therefore, we say that as the interpretation of justifiable defense in the movie "Article 20" has taken root in the hearts of the people, I think it is more necessary to pay more attention to the power of defense lawyers, because in practice, only defense lawyers are the main or even the only defenders of the legitimate rights and interests of criminal suspects and defendants, and defense lawyers should stand in the perspective of the defender and dare to put forward the most beneficial defense opinions to the case-handling unit based on the facts and the law. Of course, the correct defense opinions of defense lawyers can also help case-handling personnel discover problems in the case, prevent the emergence of unjust, false and wrongly decided cases, and better help judicial personnel correctly apply the law, and maintain the ultimate goal of fairness and justice. As Professor Han Xu, a professor at the Law School of Sichuan University and an executive director and member of the Academic Committee of the China Criminal Procedure Law Research Association, said when commenting on the movie "Article 20", "In judicial practice, the most common subject applying Article 20 of the Criminal Law to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties is the lawyer. The prosecutor's duty of objectivity and impartiality is limited, after all, it is the role of the prosecutor, and obtaining a conviction is his professional goal. When a party encounters a grievance, the state can fully protect the lawyer's right to practice, and the lawyer's correct defense opinion can be adopted by the judicial organs, so that the occurrence of unjust, false and wrongly decided cases can be truly prevented. Lawyers are an indispensable and important force in the construction of China's rule of law. Therefore, the realization of fairness and justice requires not only upright, honest and noble prosecutors and judges, but also lawyers who are "entrusted by others and loyal to others".
Xu Xiaoyun is a senior partner and director of the criminal department of Shaanxi Xu Xiaoping Law Firm.
February 18, 2024 in Xi'an.
Criminal law norms currently in force for justifiable defence:
Gao Jian Fa Ban Zi [2022] No. 167] Guiding Opinions on Properly Handling Minor Injury Cases in Accordance with Law (2022).
Fa Fa 2020 No. 31] Guiding Opinions on the Application of the Justified Defense System in Accordance with Law (2020).
Gongtong Zi 2019 No. 1] Guiding Opinions on Punishing Illegal and Criminal Acts Obstructing the Safe Driving of Public Transportation in Accordance with Law (2019).
Fa Fa 2015 No. 4] Opinions on Handling Criminal Cases of Domestic Violence in Accordance with Law (2015).
83) Gongfa (Yan) No. 109] Specific Provisions on the Implementation of Legitimate Defense in the Performance of Duties by the People's Police (1983).
Guiding Cases of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Court:
Supreme Court Guiding Case No. 93] Yu Huan's Intentional Injury Case (2018).
Supreme Court Guiding Case No. 144] "Zhang Namula Justifiable Defense Case" (2020).
Supreme People's Procuratorate Guiding Case No. 45] "Chen's Justifiable Defense Case" (2018).
Supreme People's Procuratorate Guiding Case No. 46] "Zhu Fengshan's Case of Intentional Injury (Excessive Defense)" (2018).
Supreme People's Procuratorate Guiding Case No. 47] "Yu Haiming's Justifiable Defense Case" (2018).
Supreme People's Procuratorate Guiding Case No. 48] "Hou Yuqiu's Justifiable Defense Case" (2018).
Criminal Trial Reference Cases:
No. 40] Ye Yongchao's Intentional Homicide Case - How to understand and apply the right of legitimate defense as stipulated in paragraph 3 of Article 20 of the Criminal Law.
No. 127] Wang Changyou's case of negligence causing death - how to identify and deal with hypothetical defense.
No. 133] Su Liangcai's Intentional Injury Case - Whether the intentional injury in the mutual assault was defensive in nature.
No. 138] Zhang Jianguo's Intentional Injury Case - Whether the act of defending himself after the mutual assault had ceased to stop the surprise attack of the other party was justified defense.
No. 224] Hu Yongping's Intentional Injury Case - Whether the preparation of defensive tools when personal safety is threatened affects the determination of the nature of defense.
No. 261] Bruce Lee et al. Charged with Intentional Injury - Conditions of Special Defense and the Correct Understanding of "**.
No. 297] Zhao Quanhua was charged with intentional injury - if the justifiable defense only caused minor injuries to the unlawful aggressor, he shall not be held criminally liable.
No. 353] Fan Sang-so's Intentional Injury Case - Whether a counterattack against a mentally ill person committing an assault can be justified in self-defense.
No. 363] Zhou Wenyou's Intentional Homicide Case – How to Understand "Ongoing Unlawful Infringement" in Justifiable Defense
No. 433] Li Ming's Intentional Injury Case - Whether the carrying of precautions for the purpose of preventing unlawful infringement can prevent the establishment of legitimate defense.
No. 569] Han Lin's Intentional Injury Case - How to Determine Excessive Defense.
Gazette Cases of the Supreme People's Court:
Sun Mingliang's Intentional Injury, Second Instance, Gazette of the Supreme People's Court, No. 2, 1985.
Beijing Haidian District People's Procuratorate v. Wu Jinyan, a case of intentional injury (Gazette of the Supreme People's Court, No. 11, 2004).
Wu Jinyan's Intentional Injury Case (Gazette of the Supreme People's Court, No. 11, 2004).
People's Justice: Cases:
Consideration of the Penal Penalty for Excessive Defense of Many Aggressors (Issue 32, 2016).
Wang Jing's Intentional Injury Case - Special Defense Rights Should Have Defensive Limits (No. 4, 2014).
Mou X 1 Intentional Injury Case - The Nature of the Harm Committed to a Non-Direct Perpetrator (Issue 12, 2011).