On The Relationship Between Courts And Procuratorates In Criminal Proceedings

Procuratorate and the courts in our country pursues an independent unit (orcalled "the Guanting independent"). In the field of criminal proceedings, therelationship between the Procuratorate and the court can directly determine the fieldof criminal law enforcement level, the operation level between the two sides directreaction of the judicial, legislative effect. From this perspective, the relationshipbetween the method detection can not be overemphasized. In fact, most of theprovisions of the Criminal Procedure Legislation in China is also either directly orindirectly between the regulation seizure law judicial practice.The relationship between the criminal proceedings seizure law is actually a pairof mutually promote the contradictory relationship. Seizure law the two sides sharecommon values, common administrative tendencies. The two sides in the face of theface of common inevitable problems encountered, ahead of the game. Need to gothrough the civil service exam and the National Judicial Examination to servingmembers of the group, members of both parties in the light of the civil servicemanagement class, and in fact, more of the outside world to the procuratorial organs,judicial organs title (in fact, the prosecution Houses of law in order to exercise thejurisdiction necessary to have to go through layers of approval within thisexamination and approval system and the executive exercise of the executive powersis essentially no different.) prosecutors and courts in values relative comparisonlawyers and law experts words have more in common. It also constitutes the basis ofmutual understanding. The centrism review in the case and the background of theexcessive pursuit of substantive justice, the two chambers of the seizure law isclearly in efforts to maintain mutual relationship between the harmoniousdevelopment of.The relationship between seizure law in mutual restraint in the balance ofco-ordination. Procuratorate organs for legal supervision, to implement within thescope of this paper is mainly reflected in the supervision of the court hearings, procedures and referees conclusion. The main means of correcting the illegalproposal and lodge a protest. Under the present system procuratorial organs filed forthe use of the right to protest very restrained. Consider Bench decision is theconclusion of the criminal proceedings, as well as Procuratorate performanceappraisal system is actually based on the judge’s decision as a benchmark test,prosecutors and judges on the relationship will be presented a each other constraintstrend. Very cautious because both sides will use their respective constraints means,so the two sides but will because of the constraints more closely with the trend. Ofcourse, from the structure of litigation, this case was unreasonable. I think to solvethe above problems need to rely on the localized resources looking for ways, ratherthan rely entirely on legal transplantation without restriction.Through their own research, the author found that The seizure law relationshipbetween the core of the problem is that seizure law between supervision. Seizure lawmutual supervision between the acquittal difficult due to insufficient formalization ofthe trial, conviction easy supervision of the exercise of power is not sufficient. Thisis a direct result of the defendant party in the course of criminal proceedings in anumber of entities the opportunity to be sacrificed, but this interaction is indeed arelationship between seizure law more "co-ordination" or called more harmonious.Maybe it should be said that his school had been "Criminal Procedure with thepunishment for the defendant, regardless of whether the defendant in criminalproceedings to be punished". Of course, from a certain point of view, China’sCriminal Procedure responsible for the division of labor between the seizure law,co-ordination "mechanism, it is clear that the defendant in criminal proceedings aremore likely to be punished. Ideas to solve this problem I think one is the limitbetween the inspection method to communicate specific cases the court, the secondis to find the job performance of the new standard, Inspection Act, and the third is toestablish the exercise of power on the accountability of the legal results.