| The author often meets many criminal cases of retrial in the work, some of them having been even retried for several times. Among these cases, most are instituted in view of erroneous judgment. However, there are still many retrial cases caused by retracting confessions or proofs for no reason, or instituted because of the factors unconcerned with the case. There are crowds on the "Reception Day of Chief Prosecutor" every month, and many appellants with eagerness and inflexible can always be seen in the reception room of accusation and appeal. All of the above attracts my attention to the retrial procedure. Why are there so many appellants, some of them even appealing time after time? Is it due to law enforcement officers' unjustness, or defects in the design of retrial procedure system? The author thinks that both of them are involved, and the latter is a more ultimate matter of overall importance and protracted nature, which is the subject to be discussed and settled in the paper.Except the introduction and conclusion, the body part of this paper consists of three chapters. The author analyses the present situation, existing questions and their origins from the point of view on the institution of retrial procedure by methods of positive analysis, comparison between China and foreign countries, thinking of legal principle, and so on, and also puts forward the conception and suggestion on how to consummate retrial procedure of China.In Chapterâ… , the author sets forth the theoretical basis of the establishment of retrial procedure of China and foreign countries, demonstrates the philosophical basis of Chinese retrial procedure(epistemology of Marxism) and theoretical basis of procedure law(substantive verism), and expounds the retrial procedure theories of continental and Anglo-American law system. Furthermore, the author makes a comparison between them and comments on them, thereby laying a path for querying the guiding ideology of "being practical and realistic" and "mistakes must be corrected whenever discovered". In Chapterâ…¡, the author analyses the present situation and drawbacks of the system and the practice of current retrial procedure. After reviewing the retrial procedure on the basis of legislation and practice, the author puts forward the problems existing in retrial procedure and then analyses them in great detail. The problems are as follows. Firstly, as far as the subject initiating the procedure is concerned, it is the court that starts the retrial procedure, which violates the principles of "separating accusation from trial "and "no trial with complaint" and neglects litigants, the actual subjects of litigation. Secondly, the reasons for retrial are excessively rigid in principle, therefore inconvenient for operation. Thirdly, as for the action of initiating in practice, it's too random and has too many approaches and no limits to it, which makes litigation inefficient.In Chapterâ…¢, the author puts forwards concrete conception and proposal. He regards that problems in retrial procedure, while closely related to unreasonable system design, are matters of guiding ideology in fact. So, it is necessary to rectify from guiding ideology in order to eradicate thoroughly the drawbacks in retrial system. The author ventures to query the guiding ideology of "being practical and realistic" and "mistakes must be corrected whenever discovered", and insists that legal authenticity should be treated as criterion for judging the judgments, the principle of ?????????????????(not twice for the same) be established in legislation, and balance be kept between ?????????????force of convicted judgment) and substantive verity. Only by this means could justice and efficiency be really achieved simultaneously. As to the specific system, the author maintains that qualifications of the court for instituting retrial procedure on it's own initiative should be annulled and "retrial procedure of litigants" be established in addition, moreover, he makes a design for specific...
|
PDF Full Text Request