On The Unification Of The Statutory Classification Of Evidence In China

Nowadays, evidence is familiar in our daily life, no matter in the form of evidence in science or evidence in law. What's talking here is about evidence in law. It is regulated by all the three procedural law, that is civil procedural law, criminal procedural law and administrative procedural law. Though there are minor differences in the explanation of some related words, all these three laws have divided evidence into seven categories as, documented evidence, physical evidence, audiovisuals, and testimony of witnesses, Statements of the parties, expert's conclusion and transcripts of inspection. As for this statutory classification, it looks like that there're some different thoughts in educational circles. Every one has his own idea. However, the bone of contention is always about whether the criterion of current statutory classification is suitable. To solve this problem, academic has put forward some criteria. So, to study this project is of theoretical value as well as practical value.The main purpose of my research into the unification of statutory classification criteria is to make a transition from inquisitorial system to adversary system, by making the evidence classification more practicable. To do this, on the one hand, the judicial authority can apply the evidence rules accurately when investigating the cases. On the other hand, this can do a lot to guide the parties when gathering the evidence. What's more, unification of the criterion can also avoid some divergence during the trial. So, with the notion of adversary system penetrating into legal practices gradually, the lawsuit mode is going to be perfected.Upon reaching this purpose, the first thing is to assure the principles and requirements of the unification of classification criterion. Then, we need to synthesize the current statutory classification with the theories put forward by the academic, tick out the bad and reserve the good. At the same time, attention on the rules made by Civil Legal System and the Anglo-America countries and regions must be paid. Based on all of these, I have done some research in the classical cases, employing the theories about evidence. After that, I have tried to make a tentative criterion myself. Of course, I will try my best to make comments about the rationality of my thought.Considering the status quo in China, after comparison with criterion coming from other countries, I think it is proper to divide evidence into four categories, that is physical evidence, documented evidence, speaking evidence and scientific and technical evidence, by taking the information carrier as the criterion. While making the academic calm down, this kind of criterion is of great value when working it in legal practice. So, the transition from inquisitorial system to adversary system will be well structured after the evidence system to be perfected.To elaborate my opinion, I have six parts in my paper as follows:Chapter one tells us what evidence is and its essence. Though it is only the simplest explanation, it is the base of all my paper;In my second part, I focus on the information about unification and then go ahead to assure the requirements of unification.In Part Three, summary on Chinese current statutory classification has been made. After analyzing the status quo, I have proposed some questions.And then, based on the related rules made by some typical countries, some methods which are utilized for China have been concluded.Then comes the fifth part, which is also the core of this paper. A new and tentative framework of classification has been put forward and waits to be checked by practice, although it is feasible in theory.At last, in the conclusion, the aim and impact of this paper is out here. Regulations about evidence will be well developed with the mutual effect of theory and practice. Only by rethinking the practice can help to achieve improvement to the system, and then to work for the practice again.