The Judicial Relief Of Illegal Interrogation

Interrogation is a kind of statutory investigation action, which has played an important role in exposing crime, protecting human rights and pursuing fair litigation. However, due to the unequal relationship between the investigators and the criminal suspects during the interrogation, endless illegal investigation actions are always beyond the control of the laws, so that basic human rights of criminal suspects could not be protected."No remedy, no right."As the saying in English legal theory, its concern is how to seek redress when subjects of the law are unfairly treated. In criminal litigation, judicial remedy resolves the conflict bwtween criminal suspects and the investigation agency primarily through the use of legal means, to protect the deserved basic rights of criminal suspects. Judicial remedy is just the last line of defense to protect the rights of ciminal suspects and achieve justified litigation in the process of interrogation.This paper is divided into the following four parts.The first part concerns the theoretical analysis of the judicial remedy. Through the analysis of the remedy, judicial remedy is defined as the behaviour that criminal suspects have the right to seek legal protection and request for relevant authorities to take legal measures to protect their legitimate rights and interests according to the law, so the scope of the study in the paper is also defined. By the understanding of its meaning, we could further know that judicial remedy have three basic characteristics, legal right, affiliation and extensiveness. Since any existent institution has a certain degree of value and meaning, at the end of this part we make further analysis of the significance of the judicial remedy, and point out that the judicial remedy has great significance for protecting human rights, limiting the power of investigator and achieve justified proceeding and fair judicature.The following part is about the self-criticism of current judicial remedy in China. First, we present that the judicial remedy in the strict sense for illegal investigation is not formulated and enacted in our legislation and practice, analyse our current interrogation methods in complaint and denunciation, the exclusion of illegal evidence and the compensation for damage, and then indicate that our current judicial remedy has the following several shortcomings, the more superficial than real situation of complaint and denunciation proceeding, the lack of judicial review, the finite exclusion of illegal evidence and the fact that it is hard to provide efficient remedy in the case of criminal damage compensation. According to the analysis above, we further analyse the reason why we are lack of real judicial remedy in our country, and disclose that the root causes are that all the time we insist on national parochialism in our minds, punish the crime severely in litigation purposes and persist ininstrumentalism in the choice of proceeding value.The third part is the extraterritorial study on the judicial remedy. According to the comparative analysis on relevant judicial remedy in foreign countries, we conclude that in most countries they pay much attention to the protection of rights of criminal suspects and provide them efficient ways for remedy, in which judicial review and litigation for tort action are the primary approaches.The last part refers to the improvement of our judicial remedy. An assumption about how to improve our judicial remedy is presented in the last part. The main point is to establish the right mechanisms for judicial review and strengthen the Court control of the inerrogation behaviours in investigation agency. The efficient judicial remedy of criminal suspects who are aggrieved by the unlawful interrogation could be abtained by the way of litigation so long as the time is ripe to build the litigation system for tort action in China.