| The criminal evidence discovery system, a system in the procedural law to guarantee the parties to the lawsuit to acquire the evidence information of the case before the trial, aiming at the prevention of evidence attack, promotes the efficiency of the debate of the parties and the justness the trial of criminal cases. How to perfect the frame of the system more reasonably and thus safeguarding the defending party's full right to the case information is the prerequisite to guarantee the success of the current reform of trial methods. Adopting the comparative analysis method, this thesis expounds the jurisprudent problems concerning the criminal evidence discovery system, analyzes the judicial practice and the legislative defectiveness of the criminal evidence discovery system, and puts forward some suggestions of how to perfect the criminal evidence discovery system of our country.As an important criminal procedural system, the criminal evidence discovery system covers many jurisprudent problems. With the introduction to the evolution of the US criminal evidence discovery system and the general relation to its developing course and the relevant changes of the theory of the principle of party, mainly relating the Chinese legislative and judicial practice, the writer expounds the prerequisite jurisprudent problems concerning how to perfect the criminal evidence discovery system in China. To prevent the evidence attack in the court trial is the direct motive to establish the criminal evidence discovery system. However, in the perspective of the inner value of the system, it presents the ideas of justice, efficiency and protection of human right. In the perspective of the judicial practice of China, the current reform of trial methods calls for the establishment of a more perfect evidence discovery system as well. Meanwhile, to accurately define the role and actional status of the public attorneys in the criminal proceedings and to define their objective obligations also make significance to safeguard the smooth adoption of the criminal evidence discovery system.As far as our criminal proceeding concerned, there are merely some scraps of provisions relating evidence discovery, which are seen in Article 36 and Article 150 in Criminal Procedural Law and jurisdictional interpretations promulgated by Supreme People's Procuratorate and Supreme People's Court. These norms have some drawbacks such as too narrow discovery scope, unidirection and lack of procedural provisions. Besides, with the occurrence of some disputes and problems in the judicial practice, the lawyers' right to the case information is greatly limited. This is against the basic ideas and principles of criminal proceedings, and thus hindering the furthering of the reform of the trial methods.To amend and perfect a system, the first thing is to make clear the basic rules concerned. So far as the criminal evidence discovery system concerned, the writer thinks, three principles should be put emphasis on, namely Rule of Lawfulness, Rule of Relative Reasonableness and Rule of Equilibrium of Right and Obligation. These three principles should be embodied in the time of making choice of the specific mode in the system or analyzing, criticizing relevant viewpoints. There are eight aspects related on the surface of the system. The first is about the time and site of discovery. The writer thinks, according to Rule of Lawfulness, within the frame the current laws, it is more reasonable to make a discovery in People's Procuratorate seven days before the trial. The second is about the subject of discovery. As far as the accusing party concerned, public attorneys should take part in the discovery proceedings in the name of People's Procuratorate. But to date, there is no legal provision about how the attorney of the victim can attend the proceedings. So far as the defending party concerned, in order to protect the right of the accused, other defenders except lawyers, if permitted by People's Procuratorate, can also attend the disc...
|
PDF Full Text Request