On The Exclusion Of Illegal Evidece

Exclusionary rule is the very important part of contemporary legal systems of criminal proceedings. The formal enforcement of the new rule for exclusion of illegal evidence is a major thing in the course of the constructions for criminal rule by law in our country. The utmost premise of using this rule correctly is to perceive the exclusion of illegal evidence objectively and reasonably. So the purpose of writing this paper is to discuss the issue deeply.Many internal experts expressed their views on the concept of illegal evidence, and relevant laws and judicial interpretations stated it also. In other hand, some enacted laws and judicial adjudications in Anglo-American Legal System and Continental Law System also explained the similar questions. After the Second World War, the conception of illegal evidence appeared in some international and regional legal instruments. In this section, through a series of analysis and comparison, the author will definite the illegal evidence explicitly.Obviously, removing illegal evidence includes the exclusion of illegal oral evidence, and the exclusion of physical evidence collected by unlawful searching and attaching. Meanwhile, the theory of the purpose of removing illegal evidence has been developed from the two aspects gradually. By analyzing some legal theories and judicial precedents on removing illegal guilt confession in American, Britain and Japan, and concern academic viewpoints and criminal cases of removing illegal physical evidence in American, Britain, Japan and Germany, the author think that the doctrine of excluding false, the doctrine of protecting human rights and the doctrine of controlling wrongful acts are three representative points of view on the exclusion of illegal evidence in foreign countries.Research on the exclusion of illegal evidence in our country began in 1980s. From the angle of history, and the angle of reality, the author think that we have to try to minimize the absolution of the theory for the removing illegal evidence, and push out particularly the security of the fundamental human rights of suspected offender or defendant in criminal procedure, and restraining the gross wrongful act of investigative organs in the process of collecting evidences by considering our country's political and historical tradition, background of legal culture, value and philosophy of proceeding, and the progress of democracy and rule by law.