Civil Action Against The Evidence System

The civil proceeding is the final relieving means to solve the private disputes. With the expansion of culture exchange and the frequency of the economic transaction, people's consciousness of right become stronger and the amount of disputes entering proceedings is growing, which form an impact and challenge to the culture tradition of several thousand years, that is to cherish the comity. In essence, action means counter. The core of the civil proceedings is the process in which the party, by virtue of his own evidence, counters the opposite to obtain the safeguard of state force. As a premise, solving disputes is based on the judge to the fact that has happened. Because the fact is irreparable, it only can be structured by the party by virtue of evidence, that is the legal fact recognized by law. Also according to this, the judger distinguishes right from wrong, then apply the laws. When the evidence of the parties is on the balance and it is difficult to decide which one is superior, testified by heart and testifying liability become rather reasonable and it is the cause of judging fact predictably and exerting the obligation by judger at this state of "vague fact". How to diminish the subjectivity of the judger and avoid the judicial corruption, these fundamental requirements of the civil proceedings demand the definite testifying liability, which make it urgent to perfect the civil proceedings and increase the transparency of it.At present, it still needs time for the staff to become experts, so perfecting the evidence system in the civil proceedings is our real choice, for the exhaustive regulations can enhance the fairness and thepredictability for the parties. On the basis of existing theoretical explore and practical preparation, it has been ready for the perfect construction and adaptive amendment to the evidence system.The article concentrates on the practical explore of the theory. It deems that: the evidence legislation shall legalize the counter standard of the parties, that is to make the testifying standard and testifying liability definite. According to the superiority of the evidence and the assumption of the testifying liability, a high inevitable standard shall be formed, i.e. the testify standard set forth by the judger, based on the combined judge to the evidence after the trial, defined by the heart in relative degree. As far as the recognition of evidence concerned, the testimony of the witness is rather difficult to define, for the description of witness about his feelings after the experience is processed by the brain, it is subjective. Therefore, it is important to establish the oath system to reinforce the legal force of the testimony; legalize the obligation of witness to give evidence in the court and provide the legal liability of witness refusing to give evidence; enhance the obligation of witness to give evidence in the court; perfect the liability regulation to give evidence; set forth time limit system to realize action efficiency and regulate the obligator by time limit and legal result and transparent the process of the action, open the cross-examination and the recognition of evidence to ensure that the counter of the parties by means of evidence is sufficient and full.