Font Size: a A A

Concerning Criminal Lawsuit Illegal Evidence Rule

Posted on:2012-12-30Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:H M JiaFull Text:PDF
GTID:2166330332994938Subject:Litigation
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
Exclusionary Rule, refers to criminal proceedings of evidence obtained as the illegal way, which led to the evidence of capacity (Evidence qualifications) are excluded and can not be adopted by the Court and as a basis for conviction and sentencing rules. Exclusionary Rule originated in the United States, compared to the typical Anglo-American countries, and increasingly accepted by Western countries, eventually becoming a general practice internationally. Exclusionary Rule is the essence of the protection of human rights and the constraints on public power, but also respond to the needs of the basic national conditions。This paper introduces the Exclusionary Rule Exclusionary history and basic content rules, Illegal Evidence produced in Britain, the development of more fully in the UK, not just because of illegal evidence exclusion rules between the time of longer, but because Britain and the U.S. doctrine of natural rights, they think the purpose of the law is to protect human rights, and illegal evidence exclusion rule itself is to limit public power, protect human rights, a rule, at a deeper level the laws of the State to meet the Anglo-American needs. Germany and Japan would be illegal evidence exclusion rules have been incorporated into their legal system, too, with their national conditions to measure out a free pattern, but also Germany and Japan to meet the terms of doctrine and a free trial of evidence features. Secondly, the illegal evidence exclusion rules introduced the function and value, the reason why illegal evidence exclusion rule in many countries and even have some in the international status, then there must have his indelible function and value, such as the protection of human rights, promote justice, limit public power, to curb the illegal evidence. Strict exclusion model and the United States, Germany, Japan and the freedom to measure the pattern of trade-off model in Taiwan to conduct a detailed analysis and comparison of these countries and the illegal status of the rules of evidence exclude a brief inspection, that the state illegally Exclusion of evidence is not consistent with the level of development, and found that the development of illegal evidence exclusion rule is that theory is not sufficiently advanced. I believe that the exclusionary rule permits the United States illegally more fully the development, the exclusion of illegal evidence for a more thorough, are compelled to eliminate the pattern, but below Germany, Japan and the analysis of the Taiwan region of China I believe that the Exclusionary Rule is the most important The rule of law combined with the adequacy of their national conditions, can respond to the needs of their suit. The author of China in the illegal evidence exclusion rules for the development of legislation and judicial status, found that China has released the "exclusionary rule in criminal cases for a number of provisions of the problem" before, on illegal evidence exclusion rule there is no formal provision, but to rely on scattered Constitution, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and the Code of Civil Procedure Law and other relevant provisions of some of these requirements are not uniform and there is conflicting parts. The "exclusionary rule on evidence in criminal cases for a number of provisions of the problem," the release, not only regulates the rules of the application of illegal evidence exclusion, and settled the exclusionary rule on illegal confession, even though this rule and no physical evidence of illegal poisonous tree The results were clearly defined, but the relative before the Exclusionary Rule China has already made great progress. Based on the previous analysis, that our country can build on existing trends and space, not only should the concept of change, it should be in the system reform. Further pointed out that we should follow the international trend of human rights protection, while adhering to the premise of the constitutional protection of human rights, combined with China's national conditions and the judicial tradition, I believe that the following measures should be adopted to improve the Exclusionary Rule in China, the first transparent trial in order to advance preventive effect, this measure is not only the protection of criminal suspects may have forensic evidence that has stood the illegal behavior, but also to protect the forensic officers will not be subjected to false accusations of criminal suspects. Second Detention Center and other institutions to ensure neutral, I believe some time ago the detention center to a variety of bizarre death of a great shock of everyone, the detention center neutral, from the bondage of public security organs, help to resolve this situation. Permission to expand the law to protect third parties from infringement, given the presence of lawyers questioned the right to intervene so that lawyers for timely investigation procedure, not only to protect the legitimate rights and interests, but also acts on the investigative organs play supervise the investigation and supervision role. Finally, the parties established a right of action to protect the right to remain silent, this is the view of the "truthful testimony" is concerned, in today's social environment, in order to better protect the rights of criminal suspects, the establishment of silence to follow the world trend of the measures. I hope you can make these proposals, the rules on exclusion of illegal evidence have some benefit.
Keywords/Search Tags:Exclusionary Rule, human rights protection, background, the right to silence
PDF Full Text Request
Related items