Study On Upgrading The Jurisdiction Of Arrest Of Duty Crime

September 4, 2009, the Supreme People's Procuratorate formally issued a "the cases investigation by below the provincial level People's Procuratorate examined and decided by a higher arrest People's Procuratorate (Trial) ", the introduction of the requirement is that the final choice of the Central is the point of view which the jurisdiction of arrest of Duty crime "to pay the exercise of higher level Procuratorate ".Since the implementation of the reform, how is specific procedures? How is reform effective? Also, what are the deficiencies? Based on the investigation of, by the method of empirical analysis and inductive reasoning, writer conducted research on the status of the provisions of the specification and the implementation effect.Through the investigation of the handling of a situation of a Procuratorate of C city, and the analysis of the data that it does not arrest rates, prosecution rates, light imprisonment sentence rate, and the number of cases investigated, writer believe that this reform to strengthen the prosecution's internal oversight, and to enhance the objectivity and independence of the work of review of arrest, to achieve legitimacy of arrest and procedural justice have achieved good results, moreover, such procedures do not give too much of the investigation of Duty crime, even beneficial changes in investigative. However, there are still many inadequacies of reform: first, after all, the internal supervision of the prosecution is to monitor themselves, their actual role remains limited, the neutrality of the decision of arrest authority will still be interference by lower Procuratorate; second, the reform stressed the need to arrest, but investigators often perfunctory in practice, leading to implementation of the effect of greatly reduced; again, process of handling Duty crime, the behavior of "Borrow" the review period of arrest remains, and this violation of the procedures without any punitive consequences; finally, the reform did not give the suspect's right to dissent against the arrest, and lawyers involved in the so-called because of the lack of specific implementation details have been empty set. The reason is because of this lack of procedural justice reform, both the lack of restriction of power, is an incomplete reform.The author believes that the right to review the decision of arrest should be referred to the Court ultimately exercised, just based on national conditions, being maintained by the Procuratorate also need to exercise, but should improve the relevant system: mainly the decision-making process of arrest should be improved, in the review process to arrest organizations Defendant for public hearing the two sides to review the introduction of action-style arrest mode; perfect the relief program after catching the suspect, review the case and set up the system; improve the system of people's supervisors to strengthen the social constraints Duty crime.