A Research On The Proof Responsibility For Penal Defendant

In a criminal suit, proof responsibility is a very complex question that is urgent to solve. Clarifying proof responsibility is very important for completing the lawsuit as well as realizing just and high efficient criminal suit. The distribution of penal proof responsibility, especially the issue on whether criminal suspect or defendant should undertake part of proof responsibility is very important for balancing crimes control as well as human right guarantee. Therefore, it becomes a difficult point in proof theory research as well as the judicial practice. Based on the innocence indication principle as well as accusation and defending principle, proof responsibility of criminal suit is undertook by the accusation party is the general law of distribution of proof responsibility and is recognized in theory and judicial practice in countries all over the world. For some crimes, we can not judge only from the proof provided by the accusation party. Only the defendant also provides the rational proof can reach the conclusion that he is guilty or not guilty. As a result, besides the general law of distribution of criminal proof responsibility, the penal defendant should also undertake proof responsibility. Based on this, this thesis analyzes the meaning, theoretical basis and characteristics that penal defendant should also undertake proof responsibility, starting from proof responsibility of criminal suit. The author lists the legislation and practice that defendant undertakes proof responsibility in Great Britain, France and China. Finally, the author gives legislative advice on penal defendant's proof responsibility.Therefore, this thesis is divided into four parts:Part-1 states the general survey of proof responsibility. Proof responsibility refers to the responsibility undertook by the proof main body while they are making the court judges assure its advocation by providing and performing the proof to avoid the lawsuit consequence that does harm to its own party. Proof responsibility is composed of four parts: advocating responsibility, persuasion responsibility, proof responsibility and unfavorable consequence undertaking responsibility. The above four kinds of responsibility are based on the parties on two sides, not referring whether the court should undertake proof responsibility. Proof responsibility is an organic unity. Defining it as one or several kinds of responsibility is not comprehensive and can not completely explain the actual certification process of the lawsuit. The four kinds of responsibility are related and inseparable. The former is the basis and premise of the latter. Meanwhile, they supplement with each other.Proof responsibility demands the parties concerned to provide enough proof to make the facts proposed by them become the argument focus and get the favorable verdict. So it is also called proof load, proof producing responsibility or propulsion responsibility.There are differences in the main body undertaking the responsibility, responsibility content as well as the principle of distributing responsibility between proof responsibility and proof responsibility. However, these two are interrelated. Firstly, proof responsibility and proof responsibility both refer to the responsibility in the process of ascertaining the case and both are completed with the help of proof. Secondly, if the main body undertaking the responsibility has not completed the proof responsibility or proof responsibility in practice, they must undertake certain legal consequence. Thirdly, they are interrelated especially in the phase of trial in which the ascertaining task can not be completes without any one.Penal proof responsibility distribution principle is that the accusing party undertakes proof responsibility. Specifically speaking, in public prosecution case, the public prosecution party undertakes proof responsibility and in private prosecution case, the private prosecution party should undertake the proof responsibility. The theoretical basis for accusing party to undertake proof responsibility is innocence supposing principle and principle that accusation and defendant party are equal.Part-2 covers the legal analysis on Proof responsibility undertook by penal defendant. Generally speaking, accusation party undertake the legal responsibility (e. g. proof responsibility), defendant has not the obligation to testify that he is not guilty. If we emphasize on the general principle, the consequence will run counter to our desire. This is not only unfavorable for the right of defendant, but also violates economic principle of lawsuit. It will also waste the judicial resource. Even this will result in the difficulty in finding the truth by unbridling the criminals or wronging an innocent person, which does harm to the authority of national law. Therefore, in criminal suit, defendant should undertake certain proof responsibility.There are three characteristics for defendant in undertaking proof responsibility: I. after the proof of basic facts that defendant committed crimes by the accusing party, the defendant can prove part of the legal defending facts. II. For some defending excuses of proof responsibility undertook by defendant, after the defendant performs proof responsibility, the final disproving right belongs to the accusing party. III. The defendant only undertakes the Proof responsibility for those facts that it is difficult for the accusing party to prove.Though in criminal suit, defendant can produce the proof to prove that he is not guilty or even undertake the responsibility of proving himself not guilty, viewing the characteristics of proof responsibility as well as the conditions and demands for undertaking the responsibility, his proof responsibility is different from that of accusing party. These situations can not shake the principle that the accusing party undertakes proof responsibility.Part-3 illustrates the legislation and practices that defendant undertake proof responsibility. Countries of British-American law system and Continental law system not only illustrate in theory that penal defendant should undertake proof responsibility in disproving the accusation, they also clarify the specific situations in which the defendant should undertake Proof responsibility through the written law and regulation on the basis of generalizing judicial practice experience. In other countries, (such as American and German), performing the crimes supposing and inversion of proof responsibility in a certain situation is a kind of general practice. The crime supposing system in each country mainly aims at some crimes that are difficult to prove or some plots in crimes. In the background of innocence supposing principle, endow Proof responsibility to defendant in some degree through the limited crime supposing. We can get deep enlightenment from these situations and these can be consulted by proof legislation and criminal judicature of our country.In our criminal suit, the main body undertaking proof responsibility is the accusing organ and the party concerned undertaking proof responsibility. They should undertake the responsibility to prove whether the crime happened or not, whether the criminal suspects or defendant are guilty and the criminal plots are serious or not on the basis of legal procedure. This is the direct embodiment of the old law of those who accuse produce the proof in criminal suit. Based on the regularity that there is exception where there is principle, in a few specific cases where the law supposes the defendant guilty, criminal or defendant has the proof responsibility. This is regulated in criminal law and criminal suit in each country. In China, Criminal Law regulates the proof inversion for the crime due to the vague source of large amount of asset and illegal owning such amount of asset, that is, defendant undertake certain proof responsibility.Part-4 states the perfection of penal defendant's proof responsibility system in China. In domestic criminal suit, there are only two kinds of situations where defendant can undertake proof responsibility, that is, the crime due to the vague source of large amount of asset and illegal owning such amount of asset. Therefore, there should be the written regulation on situations where defendant can undertake proof responsibility and these written regulations and laws should also obey certain principles and limitations.For the issue of defendant undertaking proof responsibility in defendant criminal suit in China, we should analyze it through associating the power of the accusing and defendant parties in suit practice in China as well as through associating the relevant legislations and suit practice in foreign and Hong Kong as well as Taiwan. Based on this, we can regulate the range within which defendant undertake proof responsibility and perfect this regulation in legislation and practice.