On The Judicial Realization For Innocent Of Doubtful Crime

The thesis is divided into five chapters:Chapter I, it is about the definition to the doubtful crime. There are two kinds of viewpoints concerning the definition of the doubtful crime in the academic circles. In author's opinion, the doubtful crime should be understood in the narrow sense. In the criminal litigation, the judicial authority treats in the litigation period the behavior of the suspect, the defendant in a suspense status, which though has the evidence to sustain, the evidences of the whole case are not yet affirmed certainly and abundantly, and could not eliminate the reasonable suspects completely. The formation of the doubtful crime has the object reason and the external reason. The existence of the doubtful crime is an object phenomenon. The recognition of the doubtful crime and the right settlement of the doubtful crime are in the functions of the criminal litigation. The cognizance criterion of the doubtful crime should start with the inverse aspect of the proof standard of the criminal litigation. That is that, the fact is unclear, and the evidences are incertitude and insufficient. The definition of the doubtful crime in the right way is the discussion basis in this whole thesis.Chapter II, it is about the establishment for the innocent of the doubtful crime. The punishment principle of the doubtful experiences a devious process, with the study on its revolution and the principle of presumption of innocence. The prescription of the doubtful, for the interest of defendant is the rudiment of the innocent for the doubtful crime. The modern legislation of each country has the prescription of the innocent for the doubtful crime basically. Our country experiences the phases of the punishment for the doubtful crime, the light punishment, and the expiating punishment. The present Criminal Procedure Law form establishes the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime in legislation. The innocent for the doubtful crime has the deep bases in the legal philosophy and the criminal jurisprudence. At present, the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime not only has the legal legitimate position, but also the importance significance in practice. In the theoretical level, its significance reflects on the human rights guarantee and the justice of the penalty purpose. In the practical level, its significance reflects on the prevention and reduction of the happening of false and wrong cases. And it has the important effect on promoting the fulfillment of the guideline of enforcing the law and executing the law strictly.Chapter III, it is about the relationships between the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime and the relevant principle. The principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime and the principle of presumption of innocence, the principle of the favor for the defendant, the principle of the favor for the defendant suspected and the principle of mitigating a punishment for a doubted crime have the close relation and have differences. Thereinto, the principle of presumption of innocence is the upper principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime. And the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime is one of the core contents of the principle of presumption of innocence. But the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime does not equal to the principle of presumption of innocence. It has the differences with the principle of presumption of innocence in the aspect of the rights guarantee of defendants, etc. The principle of the favor for the defendant and the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime have the relationship of including and included. The application scope of the former is far beyond the latter. Whether it has the premise of suspect is the main difference between the two. The principle of the favor for the defendant suspected and the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime both have the premise of suspect. But the former in the broad sense includes the circumstance of applying the legal suspect. In the legal suspect, it should devise the conclusion in the favor of the defendant; in the fact suspect, it should make the determination or decision in the favor of the defendant. The main difference between the two is that the former has the room of free determination and the latter means the end of the procedure. The principle of mitigating a punishment for a doubted crime is the principle of the favor for the defendant suspected in the narrow sense. The object of the proper suspect is the facts which have the influence on the adjudgement and sentence. Its result is not the negative answers to all the criminal responsibility of the defendant. It only makes the determination in favor of the defendant. So in the application scope of the innocent for the doubtful crime, its application results have differences. In summary, these principles have the differences and the quite close relationship with the principle of the innocent for the doubtful crime. When the judicial staff faces these principles, first they should recognize its application scope seriously and live up to the precise application; next, if it could apply the most appropriate specific principles, it should avoid its upper principle or other principles which could apply widely. The significance of discussing the relationship between these principles is mainly on the good preparation of the judicial realization of study on the innocent for doubtful case of crime.Chapter IV, it is about the procedural realization of the principle of innocent for doubtful case of crime before the trial. The principle of innocent for doubtful case of crime could apply to the investigation, prosecution and the adjudgment of the criminal procedure. In the registering phase, it has no principle of any punishment for doubtful case of crime; the investigation phase is the key phase which appears the suspect. The behavior of innocent for doubtful case of crime is no prosecution in suspect. The Criminal Procedure Law concerning that is the Article 140th which needs review. That is, the People's Procuratorate withdraws the prosecution to the investigation department for the first makeup investigation, when it thinks that the evidences are deficient and do not accord to the prosecution condition. After that, if the People's Procuratorate still thinks that the evidences are deficient and do not accord to the prosecution condition, it could make the decision of no prosecution, or withdrawing the prosecution to the investigation department for the second makeup investigation. But after the second makeup investigation, it still does not accord with the prosecution conditions; the People's Procuratorate makes the treatment of no prosecution.Chapter V, it is about the realization of the principle of innocent for doubtful case of crime in the adjudgement phase. In the adjudgement phase, the principle of innocent for doubtful case of crime has the propriety and justification endowed by the law. But in the reality, it is hard for doubtful crime to have innocent. This is mainly showing on the difficulty of the changing of the concept. In the practice, the principle of innocent for doubtful case almost is not used, and the academic circles bring forward some doubtful aspect. Some of the scholars also bring forward some doubtful aspect concerning the principle of innocent for doubtful case. In the practical business, there is also room for the determination. In the second hearing procedure, the practice such as putting the doubtful case back for hearing, these all belong to the vague understanding of the principle of innocent for doubtful case. All should be clarified. In real level, we should accord with the principle of innocent for doubtful case strictly. In the process of innocent for doubtful case, as a principle for the criminal litigation, the doubtful case could not be alone. Its judicial realization depends on the found and perfection of the relevant matching system. First, from the aspects of regulating the realization procedure, establishing the principle of eliminating the illegal proof, and the diversified criminal proof criterion etc, it should perfect the evidence system. Second, it should establish the effectiveness of innocent for doubtful case, make the re-hearing procedures strictly. The determination of the innocent for doubtful case has also the adjudged force, and the both parties should obey to it. When the new facts and evidences appear, the prosecuting department should re-hear the case according to the procedures of adjudgement and supervision. The determination of innocent for doubtful case could be reheard because of the requirements of the substantive justice. The plea-bargaining is not perfect for the judicial justice. But if it runs properly, it could realize to separate the easy ones from the difficult ones, and increase the litigation efficiency. For the debating party, if the defendant is really guilt, they will mostly accept the bargaining after the balance, and exchange the meritorious performance and admitting the guilt initiatively for the light punishment. This is reasonable in treating the doubtful cases.Proper application to the principle of innocent for doubtful case of crime also involves the establishment and perfection of a series of the matching system and the measure. With the legalization construction and advancing the judicial reform, the process for the doubtful case is not smooth, but we will make it finally.