With the full implementation of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the application of the rules of the exclusion of the illegal evidences is more inclined to the protection of the human rights. However, in the process of...With the full implementation of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the application of the rules of the exclusion of the illegal evidences is more inclined to the protection of the human rights. However, in the process of the implementation of the new laws, the problems in view of the rules of the exclusion of the illegal evidences are also prominent, which are mainly reflected in the ambiguity of the scope of the application, the start of the program of the exclusion, and the formalization the trial certificates and other aspects. Therefore, in this article, the author starts from the concept of the illegal evidences, and expounds the principles of the exclusion and the abilities of the evidences, and especially explores the abilities of the evidences and the probative forces. From the differences between the two, the author strictly proves the virtualization of the standards, in order to provide the positive solutions for strengthening the exclusionary procedure of the illegal evidences.展开更多
Procedural defense is a form of defense proposed by defense counsel based on criminal procedural law,aiming to safeguard litigation rights and supervise the legality of procedures.It is an important component of crimi...Procedural defense is a form of defense proposed by defense counsel based on criminal procedural law,aiming to safeguard litigation rights and supervise the legality of procedures.It is an important component of criminal defense.The illegal evidence exclusion rule is the core content of procedural defense and an important means to achieve judicial justice in criminal cases.This paper,taking the illegal evidence exclusion rule as its core,explores procedural defense from both theoretical and practical perspectives.Firstly,it defines the concept of procedural defense and reviews the development of the illegal evidence exclusion rule,elucidating its current status.Secondly,it categorizes four types of procedural defense:request-based,demand-based,defensive,and remedial,elaborating on their characteristics,application conditions,operational methods,and practical effects.Through a case analysis of the“Zhang Guoxi Bribery Case,”it demonstrates the specific application of procedural defense in practice.Thirdly,it discusses the value significance of procedural defense,pointing out that procedural defense not only embodies the value of procedural justice but also contributes to achieving the goal of substantive justice.It is of significant theoretical and practical value for safeguarding the litigation rights of defendants,supervising the procedural legality of prosecuting authorities,and promoting the efficiency and fairness of criminal proceedings.Finally,it analyzes the challenges and dilemmas faced by procedural defense in China’s criminal procedural practice,mainly manifested in the lack of clear and perfect legal basis,the unfair and undemocratic practice environment,and the insufficiently significant and stable practical effects of procedural defense.Some improvement strategies and suggestions are proposed in order to provide reference for the healthy development and wide application of procedural defense.展开更多
China＇s Amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law of 2012 revises the provisions on rules of evidence. There are a number of positive changes compared to the original text, but some shortcomings still exist. For instan...China＇s Amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law of 2012 revises the provisions on rules of evidence. There are a number of positive changes compared to the original text, but some shortcomings still exist. For instance, although the legislation recognizes the right against compulsory self-incrimination, it does not acknowledge the right to silence and retains the obligation of the accused to confess; the amended provisions are more tolerant of the use of illegal tactics like ＂threats,＂ ＂enticement＂ and ＂deceit＂ to obtain confessions; the legislative approach does not resolutely deter unlawful search and seizure in the collection of evidence; and although there are provisions for protection of persona/safety, financial compensation and judicial sanctions to ensure that witnesses appear before court to testify, there are no provisions on the most important rule in the evidence system, the hearsay rule.展开更多
In the past, international Evidence law reformers have focused primarily on substantive evidentiary doctrines. However, for reforms to be effective, the courts and legislatures must state the revised doctrines in a fo...In the past, international Evidence law reformers have focused primarily on substantive evidentiary doctrines. However, for reforms to be effective, the courts and legislatures must state the revised doctrines in a form that promotes the overall objectives of the legal system. The basic choice facing reformers is among a creed identifying broad goals, a code stating flexible principles, and a catalogue prescribing detailed rules. In the past, especially in the United States, there was a consensus among Evidence scholars that the code format is preferable. However, if a key objective of a national legal system is to encourage pretrial disposition of cases, the courts and legislatures should give serious thought to utilizing a catalogue format. That format is especially attractive in the doctrinal areas such as privilege in which evidentiary rules are intended to affect primary behavior outside the courtroom.展开更多
文摘With the full implementation of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the application of the rules of the exclusion of the illegal evidences is more inclined to the protection of the human rights. However, in the process of the implementation of the new laws, the problems in view of the rules of the exclusion of the illegal evidences are also prominent, which are mainly reflected in the ambiguity of the scope of the application, the start of the program of the exclusion, and the formalization the trial certificates and other aspects. Therefore, in this article, the author starts from the concept of the illegal evidences, and expounds the principles of the exclusion and the abilities of the evidences, and especially explores the abilities of the evidences and the probative forces. From the differences between the two, the author strictly proves the virtualization of the standards, in order to provide the positive solutions for strengthening the exclusionary procedure of the illegal evidences.
文摘Procedural defense is a form of defense proposed by defense counsel based on criminal procedural law,aiming to safeguard litigation rights and supervise the legality of procedures.It is an important component of criminal defense.The illegal evidence exclusion rule is the core content of procedural defense and an important means to achieve judicial justice in criminal cases.This paper,taking the illegal evidence exclusion rule as its core,explores procedural defense from both theoretical and practical perspectives.Firstly,it defines the concept of procedural defense and reviews the development of the illegal evidence exclusion rule,elucidating its current status.Secondly,it categorizes four types of procedural defense:request-based,demand-based,defensive,and remedial,elaborating on their characteristics,application conditions,operational methods,and practical effects.Through a case analysis of the“Zhang Guoxi Bribery Case,”it demonstrates the specific application of procedural defense in practice.Thirdly,it discusses the value significance of procedural defense,pointing out that procedural defense not only embodies the value of procedural justice but also contributes to achieving the goal of substantive justice.It is of significant theoretical and practical value for safeguarding the litigation rights of defendants,supervising the procedural legality of prosecuting authorities,and promoting the efficiency and fairness of criminal proceedings.Finally,it analyzes the challenges and dilemmas faced by procedural defense in China’s criminal procedural practice,mainly manifested in the lack of clear and perfect legal basis,the unfair and undemocratic practice environment,and the insufficiently significant and stable practical effects of procedural defense.Some improvement strategies and suggestions are proposed in order to provide reference for the healthy development and wide application of procedural defense.
文摘China＇s Amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law of 2012 revises the provisions on rules of evidence. There are a number of positive changes compared to the original text, but some shortcomings still exist. For instance, although the legislation recognizes the right against compulsory self-incrimination, it does not acknowledge the right to silence and retains the obligation of the accused to confess; the amended provisions are more tolerant of the use of illegal tactics like ＂threats,＂ ＂enticement＂ and ＂deceit＂ to obtain confessions; the legislative approach does not resolutely deter unlawful search and seizure in the collection of evidence; and although there are provisions for protection of persona/safety, financial compensation and judicial sanctions to ensure that witnesses appear before court to testify, there are no provisions on the most important rule in the evidence system, the hearsay rule.
文摘In the past, international Evidence law reformers have focused primarily on substantive evidentiary doctrines. However, for reforms to be effective, the courts and legislatures must state the revised doctrines in a form that promotes the overall objectives of the legal system. The basic choice facing reformers is among a creed identifying broad goals, a code stating flexible principles, and a catalogue prescribing detailed rules. In the past, especially in the United States, there was a consensus among Evidence scholars that the code format is preferable. However, if a key objective of a national legal system is to encourage pretrial disposition of cases, the courts and legislatures should give serious thought to utilizing a catalogue format. That format is especially attractive in the doctrinal areas such as privilege in which evidentiary rules are intended to affect primary behavior outside the courtroom.
