Comment On The Obligation Of Truthfulness And Its Regulation To Civil Self-admission

Obligation of truthfulness, as a system to regulate the conducts of two parties in civil litigation, has been wildly discussed in western countries as early as 19th century. Austria and Germany have put the Obligation of truthfulness into the law. As an amendable rule of Adversary, the Obligation of truthfulness reflects the development of the Civil Procedure Law dialectic. Self-admission which is based on the will of the parties to bind the court finding the facts, and plays a significant role under the principle of debate. With the continuous development of society, economic activity and people's behavior has become complex and diverse, civil proceedings have many problems in full compliance with the rules of traditional self-admission. For example, the two parties have malicious collusion, false prosecution, or use the rule of self-admission to defraud the court and obtain the determined adjudication in order to avoid the real debt. It has no doubt that such behavior will cause huge damage to the third person, and the public interests of the community, as well as provoke the judicial authority, and threaten justice. Therefore, it is necessary to reconsider and improve the traditional rule of self-admission. The adversary and the principles of party control, as the base of self-admission and indeed the base of the move of civil procedure have revealed a lot of drawbacks in so many years of judicial practice. And the main source of their problems is parties and other proceedings participants shall be in the non-integrity behavior. Such conduct has resulted in abuse of rights of action, disorder of litigation, the delay of the proceedings, the damage of the relative interests and judicial powers. Therefore, with the development of civil litigation, after a large number of theoretical study and long-term judicial practice, most scholars agree that the traditional adversary should be revised, the original principle of party control should be change into the amendment of principle of party control, to strengthen the state intervention and intensify the commanding rights of the judges in the proceedings. We regard the principle of good faith, which is used in the area of private law, as a fundamental principle of procedural law. Under its spirit, we establish a series of acts to bind unbridled litigation. In the statement of facts, we place Obligation of truthfulness to regulate the parties, especially the self-admission with the special effect. In the proceedings, the Obligation of truthfulness requires the parties against "positive lie" in order to prevent the emergence of devoid of conscience, and playing with acts of illegal means to get the victory. Self-admission requires the judge must respect the fact that the parties admit themselves, the judges only can confirm the terms of reference, and can not investigate, and use it as a basis for judgments. Self-admission and the Obligation of truthfulness, are seem to be contrary in the nature and function, what kind of interaction should be have to coordinate each other, so as to not only effectively protect the orderly administration of justice and the rights of private law, but also keep the proceedings running in a real and efficient way? This essay will discuss in detail the Obligation of truthfulness and the relevant content; meanwhile, I will combine with the relevant legal principles to explore regulation of the Obligation of truthfulness to the civil self- admission.