On The Trend Of Development Of The Legal System Of Free Evaluation Of Evidence And Legal Evidence

The basis of civil court ruling is predicated on establishing facts, which rely on evidence to prove. How a court of law determines recognition of fact through evidence is generally distinguished in two ways: namely the system of free evaluation evidence and the system of legal evidence. In nations that adopt continental legal system, which invest professional judges with the jurisdiction, the evidence validity, power of proof and case facts are at the judge's discretion, i.e., the system of free evaluation evidence. Whereas in the British and American legal system that employs the jury-trial paradigm, the parties argue against each other for the jury to determine recognition of case facts. In such a system since the jury is made up of public representatives rather than legal professionals, a set of complicated rules governing recognition of evidence must be provided by law for the jury to follow, and hence such a system is oriented on legal evidence.The system of free evaluation evidence arose from the code of civil procedures decreed after the French revolution, adopted by Germany before spreading to Japan and old China of the Asian continent. By then the system of free evaluation evidence was no longer in its original form of being left to the judge's subjective authority, but subject to legal provisions to embody the gist of the system of legal evidence and the objectiveness of the system of free evaluation evidence. Likewise the British and American legal system's evidence recognition paradigm had also evolved from the dated mechanical system of legal evidence: restrictions were relaxed, allowing the judge to preside cases according to the power vested, thus accorded the judge appropriate amount of free-evaluation function. Henceforth from the viewpoint of legal system development, the melding of the system of free evaluation evidence and the system of legal evidence, extracting and espousing the best of both, was inevitable in the reform of civil litigation system. The purpose of the melding is to discover objective truth and to realize fairness andjusticefor all.To serve the public well, to accrue judges of honorable integrity and erudite legal knowledge, and to build an efficient and effective civil court system, these are as much the indelible responsibilities to a modem government as the quintessential conditions to building a socialist modern society. To attain such a goal lies foremost in the framework of an effective, sound civil court system that adopts the good and removes the bad of both evidence systems to fashion one that uniquely suits the nation's customs and cultureto deter excessive rectification.