| The excluding or admitting of evidence is not only the core issue in Anglo-American evidence law, but also an important part of the theoretical research and judicial practice in Civil Law System. However, the admissibility of evidence is still a brand new subject in China. Although civil procedural scholars have conducted a series of research on this subject, their counterpart in the field of criminal procedure law are relative laggard. There is no monograph on this subject so far. Due to the lag of theoretical research, compact and applicable evidence rules concerning admissibility are absent in our legal system, the practice of admitting or excluding evidence is various for lack of uniform rules and standard. In this case, evidence cannot be prevented from being obtained illegally. Wrong adjudications emerged very often. To ensure the truth and propriety of proof, it's urgent for China to enact relative evidence rules, establish hearings to admit evidence, and adopt the idea that evidence can be admitted only if it is admissible. Therefore, explorations on issues concerning admissibility of evidence could not only enrich the theoretical research on evidence law in China, but also help to push the legislation of evidence law and guide the judicial practice. This paper contains eight chapters. After introducing some basic concepts concerning admissibility, the author traces the history and development of admissibility theory, compares the evidence rules on admissibility between Anglo-American and Civil Law legal system. On this basis, the author analyzes the value and implementing procedure of admissibility rules. Finally, the author put forward some suggestions of establishing admissibility rules in the context of China.Chapter 1 Analysis on Basic ConceptsIn this chapter, the author discusses concepts of relevancy and admissibility and compares them with some similar concepts. To understand the concept of relevancy, the author also introduces logical relevancy, legal relevancy, conditional relevancy, multi-ply relevancy and confined relevancy. Because the chapter focuses on admissibility, the author not only discusses the meanings of admissibility, but also introduces the two main means by which questions concerning admissibility are dealt with. In most cases, questions of admissibility are governed by evidence rules. However, under certain situations, the trial judge has the discretion to exclude evident produced by prosecution. In American evidence law, only when it is material and provable, the evidence could be regarded as relevant. Weightis the quantitative evaluation of evidence's proof value. Qualification of evidence is the counterpart of admissibility in Civil Law countries, but the two terms are not identical. Validity is one of the characteristics of evidence in China. It doesn't have the same meaning with admissibility, either. Valid evidence might be inadmissible, while invalid evidence might be admitted.Chapter 2: Formation and Development of Admissibility TheoryIn this chapter the author explores and compares the history and developing trend of admissibility theory in Anglo-American Law System with that in Civil Law System, and makes some comments on them respectively. The author holds that the formation of admissibility theory and relative evidence rules has the following contributing factors: jury trial, adversary model of criminal procedure, needs to protect human rights of defendants, confine free evaluation and protect other social interest. Because there is less legislation concerning evidence admissibility in Civil Law System than that in Anglo-American Law System, the author merely introduces theories of admissibility in a couple of typical Civil Law countries, such as Germany, France and Japan. Although there are some differences between the admissibility rules in two law systems, there is also a common trend that the scopes of admissible evidence in two law systems come close and they both combine the evidence rules with judicial discretion in dealing w...
|
PDF Full Text Request