Research On Criminal Presumption

The criminal presumption has been widely favored by judicial practice authority in recent years because of its functions of alleviating the difficulty of proof and im-proving litigation efficiency. However, the seriously deficient norms of the criminal presumption in the legislation and the considerable differences in theoretical studies make the application of criminal presumption in practice chaotic. On the whole, there are two kinds of errors of criminal presumption from judiciary. First, criminal Justice of the inferences using circumstantial evidence drawn as the case of the "presumption of fact", which does not meet what the presumption should be, confusing the differ-ence of inference and presumption. Second, the presumption is used widely. Espe-cially, "presumption of fact" is used for the case with no legal basis of the presump-tion, which eliminates the prosecution's burden of proof and commits to the defendant. This makes the specific public policy inherent in the presumption can't be imple-mented, but also to some extent, increase the defendant's burden of proof and damage the legal rights of the accused. From the establishment of the presumption, there are also some seemingly presumption rules in China's judicial interpretations, but in fact are the terms of inference rules, which inference the understanding of the concept of presumption. In this paper, a clear concept of the criminal presumption is explained according to the basic situation of China's criminal justice, combined with two legal concepts for the understanding of the presumption. And on this basis, the boundaries of presumptions and inferences and the relationship between presumption and evi- dence are analyzed and provide some relevant recommendations for creation and im-provement of the criminal presumption of our country.This paper is consisted of the introduction, main text and conclusion. Main text is divided into three parts:The first part, the concept of criminal presumption is defined. The understanding of the concept for the presumption is also more confusion now in our country, espe-cially in criminal proceedings as the basic principle of the presumption of innocence, which makes the existence of presumption more stringent requirements. In this chap-ter, the structure of the presumption and the interpretation of criminal experience and policy foundation of the presumption are analyzed. For the current situation of confu-sion of the concept of presumption and inferences, the reason of non-given indepen-dent sense of "presumption of fact" in criminal proceedings is analyzed. The relation-ship and difference between presumption and inference of indirect evidence are con-cluded in order to correct errors of presumption appliance in practice.The second part, the effectiveness of the criminal presumption is analyzed. In this chapter, there are three kinds of the relationship between the presumption and the evidence, which are presumption to the change of the object of proof, presumption to burden of proof and the relationship between presumption and the standard of proof. Highlight the nature characteristics of the presumed replacement certificate and the change of the general distribution of the burden of proof.The third part, our country's criminal presumption of creation and improvement is investigated. In this chapter, the establishment in the presumption of criminal law is combed. The relevant rules of the similar presumption in judicial interpretation are listed. The deficiencies in the system of criminal presumption are analyzed, and make recommendations to improve.