Research On The Disclosure Of Evidence System In Criminal Procedure

The basic meaning of Disclosure of Evidence is that the parties obtain the information about the case from each other before the criminal trial. The value of Disclosure of Evidence can't be ignored in maintaining the procedural justice and enhancing the procedural efficiency, especially in the adversary system that doesn't adopt the system of delivering of dossier. Our new Criminal Procedure Law adopts the reasonable elements of the adversary system. It enhances the counterwork between the charger and the accused, but the counterwork is often unequal because the defense can't obtain the evidences equally just like the prosecutor, so the defendant's rights can't be protected perfectly. Meanwhile, the charger and the defense often disguise their evidences before the trial and then put forward the evidences by surprise in the court, in order to achieve the purpose of winning the lawsuit, and this behavior often brings negative effect on the quality and the efficiency of the trial. Along with the reform of our criminal procedural system, the Disclosure of Evidence has become the exigent problem that may be baffle the realization of procedural justice and procedural efficiency. The paper consists of four chapters. The first chapter is the outline of Disclosure of Evidence System in criminal procedure. Disclosure of Evidence is a judicial action that the charger and the defense exchange their evidences and other information about the penal case and prepare for the formal trial. It is one of the means of counterwork between the charger and the defense under the adversary system. It started from Britain in the 17th century in the form of legal precedent. In 1946, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure made stipulations concerning the Disclosure of Evidence in the form of written law. Criminal Procedure and Investigation Act 1996 in Britain had regulated the Disclosure of Evidence systematically in the form of Code. The main values of Disclosure of Evidence are: (1) it is helpful to disclose the case's facts; (2) it is helpful to maintain the procedural justice, thrift the judicial resource and enhance the procedural efficiency; (3) in the criminal proceeding, it is helpful to maintain and carry out fair competition and protect the defendant's procedural rights. The second chapter is the comparative research on the Disclosure of Evidence System in criminal procedure. The Disclosure of Evidence in Britain and America is the most perfect rules in the world and meanwhile because the two countries both belong to the Anglo-American Law System, the Disclosure of Evidence in these two countries are similar. They both adopt the two-way system of evidence disclosure, and pay more attention to the defense who is in the disadvantage situation. Meanwhile, when the charger and the defense have controversies, the court will take the function of judging it impartially. Italy and Germany adopt the one-way system evidence disclosure, and emphasis on the leading role of the national organ in Disclosure of Evidence. Japan adopts the two-way system of evidence disclosure, but the scope is only limited on the evidences which used in the court. Therefore, after summarizing the rules and the precedents in these countries, we can see that the Disclosure of Evidence develops in such trend: (1) the way of disclose the evidence develops from the prosecutor's one-way system to the charger and defense's two way system; (2) the scope of the disclose evidence is enlarged gradually; (3) the judicial relief of Disclosure of Evidence is strengthened gradually.The third chapter is the Disclosure of Evidence's status quo in our country and the feasibility to establish the system. After analyzing the status quo in our country we can see that: (1) the scope of the prosecutor's disclosure of evidence is narrow, ambiguous, and the defense lawyer's right to consult the files about the case can't be protected actually; (2) there is no relative regulation about the defense disclose the evidence to the prosecutor and also no provision about the proceedings of Disclosure of Evidence; (3) when meeting some obstacles, there is no relative judicial relief; (4) the proceeding of Disclosure of Evidence is ambiguous and disorder. These problems bring various malpractice to our judicial practice. So it is necessary to establish the Disclosure of Evidence system: (1) it is the necessary requirements for constructing the contemporary criminal system of judging impartially and the department of prosecution and judgment; (2) it is helpful to maintain the "equality of arms"of the charger and the accused in criminal procedure and to protect the defendant's rights; (3) it is beneficial to realize the balance between the prosecutors and the defense, and avoid the ambush in the trial, and let the Disclosure of Evidence form the beneficial circles; (4) it can avoid the delay and disorder of the trial and achieve the procedural efficiency; (5) it can reduce the inappropriate prosecution, and ensure the quality of the trial; (6) it is the guarantee to consolidate the supervision of the litigation, avoid the misuses of power, etc. At the same time, we should realize that there are many obstacles to establish the Disclosure of Evidence System, such as: the restriction of value conception, the lack of some relative regulations, the lack of the lawyers, the unsettled of the center status of the trial. The fourth chapter is the legislative advices on establishing the Disclosure...