The Court Changes The Theories Of Sue The Criminal Charges System Construction Or Purchase

in judicatory practice, the way of doing of the court alteration indictment criminal charges is a very widespread phenomenon.The our country code of criminal court did not make an explicit provision to this problem.The Supreme People's Court released in 1998 of《concerning carry out the People's Republic of China code of criminal court > some problems of< of hermeneutic》a the power that gave the court of the people to change to sue the criminal charges, but, shoulded rule to cause the extensive issue in the educational circles, the scholars as to it's the gains or losses praise or blame was different.This text mainly from compare the angle of the method, at investigated the two greatest methods to fasten and the other nationses and the way of doing of the region after, changed the theories construction or purchase of sue the criminal charges to the our country to put forward some suggestions. This text mainly from compare the angle of the method, at investigated the two greatest methods to fasten and the other nationses and the way of doing of the region after, changed the theories construction or purchase of sue the criminal charges to the our country to put forward some suggestions.The article totally was divided into five greatly part of, a part mainly is lift to go wrong, the lawmaking that introduce the court change the indictment the criminal charges problem at the our country and practice the present condition and the theories field to contend for the (?) to this problem. The second part, after relatively analyzing the scholarses to change the standpoint of problem concerning the criminal charges, the way of doing that lay claim to and should change to sue the criminal charges to the court carries on the analysis of the dialectical: it one side that is current actively-the punishment that carried out to the crime;also have negative of one side-against the request of the procedure justice; Therefore, problem is we how should have the restriction of to carry out the court to the criminal charges of alteration power, in order to can the grow to avoid short, come to perfect court's alteration system for the indictment criminal charges.For resolving this problem, at the third part, the writer further analyzed the reason of direct change criminal charges in court, so that we have of put the (?) ground to solve problem. At the four-part cent, the writer fastens to the two greatest methods and other nations and the related system of the region carried on the investigation.The detection proceeds from the consideration toward the litigation efficiency, the two greatest methods fasten and the code of criminal court (?) and judicial precedents of Japan and our country Taiwanese region all allow the court alteration indictment criminal charges, but all follow the certain bottom limit again in the meantime, namely all taking doing not hinder the accused person's right to defense to exercise and controling,arguing,cutting three squares equilibrium structure as the principle.On this foundation, the German code of criminal court rules the public prosecution to changes the system and change ex-"tell- defense procedure";British and American methods fasten to disallow the judge to change to sue the criminal charges in principle, therefore, British and American methods pass to draw up the articles system to limit the power of the assize change indictment criminal charges.But proceed from the consideration of the litigation vivid, have already improvise as well.This improvises to be subjected to the entity method level again up of restriction, namely judge can contract to affirm to forgive the sex criminal charges. The Japanese method creates to rather have"tell because of" system of native special features in absorbing the two greatest methods to fasten the foundation of the advantage.On the other hand, pass to tell because of system, limit the judge's judgment scope and to the alteration power of the criminal charges;but it again with deny to change the articles in principle of the British and American methodses fasten the dissimilarity, because it allows to tell because of change; On the other hand, it"the public prosecution fact" system that still reserves mainland method to fasten, namely the judge has to be limit by"the public prosecution fact same sex" to the alteration power of the criminal charges, protect the accused person's defense power and will not be subjected to the restriction with this, this, fasten the dissimilarity with mainland method that do not adopt to tell because of system again.The code of criminal court of the Taiwanese region of the our country passes"the public prosecution fact same sex" to guard against with the strict procedure restriction because judge's change sues the criminal charges but for accused the person defendoofs the invasion of the power. Pass the investigation analysis to the above-mentioned nation and the region, writer at the fifth part put forward the our country mainland region to build up the theories project that the judge changes the criminal charges system.After comprehensive absorption all countries of theories, the crime that combines the our country constitutes the theories, build up the criminal charges of the localization to change the system.