| There are constantly calls for the reform of criminal procedure codes, among which, early establishment and improvement of evidence rules to exclude illegal evidence is one important element. Although the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Supreme People's Court's judicial interpretation of the words on illegally obtained evidence should not adopt the provisions of the letter have been some, but our judicial reform and the process of building a harmonious society still far. It seems particularly important for the exclusive rules of illegal evidence, in criminal procedure codes to be promulgated early in order to further improve legislature and regulate law enforcement acts.The thesis is divided into 4 chapters.Chapter I, it's an overview of the illegal evidence exclusion rule. The extension includes not only the judicial breach of statutory proceedings to evidence obtained by illegal means, including the contents of the evidence, evidence forms, such factors as the main body of evidence collected illegal evidence. Exclusionary rule is the law had stipulated that the evidence obtained by the procedures and methods to violations of procedure or way to get the evidence should not be accepted. Each is a system whereby all of its own corresponding social value. Otherwise, there would be no sense of the system. Exclusionary rule also has its own unique value to society as a whole and the maintenance of individual rights and state power balance value.Chapter II, illegal evidence exclusion rules apply to the situation in China. The reason for the establishment in China of illegal evidence exclusion rule, one important reason is that our existing measures to prevent acts of unlawful taking of evidence serious enough, could not shoulder the exclusionary rule to bear the responsibility. Such as criminal prosecution, the Procuratorate supervise the activities of the investigation department, and internal disciplinary sanctions, the questioning of the audio and video recording system had many deficiencies. Exclusionary rule's in China sources of law are the "Supreme People's Court on the implementation of interpretation of a number of issues," Article 61 provides: "Forbidden to use illegal methods to collect evidence. All have been confirmed to do is use torture or threat, enticement, deceit and other illegal methods to obtain witness testimony, statements of victims, confession of the accused can not be taken as a basis.", People's Procuratorate Rules of Criminal Procedure," Article 265 also stipulates: " Forbidden to use illegal methods to collect evidence. To torture or threat, enticement, deceit and other illegal methods to obtain confessions of criminal suspects, victim statements, witness testimony, can not serve as the basis for criminal charges." These two judicial interpretations to the exclusionary rule provide legal support, after the close of investigation, investigating authorities no longer involved in criminal activities, and then the exclusionary rule is difficult to play its due role.Chapter III, illegal evidence exclusion rules compare with other country law. In common law, the United States of illegal evidence exclusion rules has narrow sense and abroad sense. Illegal evidence in the narrow sense refers only to the trial shall not violate the constitution adopted by the Fourth Amendment prohibiting illegal search and seizure provisions of the protection of evidence obtained. Illegal evidence in the broad sense also includes the basis for constitutional amendments and other provisions of the provisions of relevant evidence excluded, but often referred to as the Constitution Sixth Amendment exclusionary rule, due process, and even self-incrimination exclusionary rule exclusionary rule. The United Kingdom in 1984, "Police and Criminal Evidence Act" provides for three types of exclusion of illegally obtained evidence: first, to force the ground; second, to section 76 (2) provided the ground is not reliable; third, to the provisions of section 78 of the impartiality of the ground. In civil law, illegal evidence in Germany originated in Ernest Beling in the twentieth century's evidence prohibition theory. In 1950, the German legislature, in an article in the Code of Criminal Procedure 136 (a), the content is forced to obtain confessions excluded. Later, in 1960 and 1964, the German Federal Supreme Court made two very famous case, that is the case of tapes and diaries of the case, so that evidence prohibition theory into practical application of theory. Japan's Constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure clearly states that the "involuntary confession" of exclusion. Constitution, Article 38 (2) provides that, "to force, torture or threat of a confession obtained, or through improper after long-term detention or detention by the evidence, shall not be used as evidence." Code of Criminal Procedure Article 319 (1) provides:" For force, torture or coercion of confessions, after a long detention, or detention inappropriate after the confession, and other can not because of suspected confessions of free will, are not as evidence."Chapter IV, it's improvement of illegal evidence exclusion rule. The basis of illegal evidence exclusion should be the constitution, only the police did not violate the constitution in order to ensure such an important value, it is worth paying such a high price for excluding evidence. It should be mandatory exclusion of illegal evidence that is illegal as long as the judge confirmed the existence of evidence to be excluded automatically, without the need for judge's discretion. Illegally obtained the testimony of witnesses and the statements of victims should not be excluded, because the evidence should be excluded should be evidence of violation of the Constitution. The constitution only provides for criminal proceedings in the prosecution of human rights and does not require the constitutional rights of witnesses and victims. There is the Chinese law prohibits the use of detention for witnesses and victims of sexual interrogation, custodial interrogation of an object can only be the defendant. The establishment of pre-trial procedures, this can be avoided illegally obtained evidence the trial judge's decision on impact. Provides the principle of reverse burden of proof in criminal proceedings, the defense to obtain evidence of belonging to torture or threat, inducement, fraud and other illegal methods to collect the suspect, the confession of the accused or the violation of criminal suspects and defendants right to legal counsel obtained the suspect, the confession of the accused case, An application of the exclusion, not by the prosecution to bear the responsibility of that case to prove beyond reasonable doubt to achieve the degree. Prohibition of new evidence that prosecutors investigation department found evidence of the existence of illegal acts, should not be allowed to re-investigation departments investigate and collect evidence to investigators of the illegal acts evidence did not dare to have any chance heart.In this paper, these four parts research on illegal evidence exclusion rules. My purpose is to improve the illegal evidence exclusion rules, better protection of human rights.
|
PDF Full Text Request