Research On Admissibility And Legal Boundaries Of Deceptive Interrogation

With the development of the Criminal Procedure Law, the concept of humanrights protection has gradually been implemented, especially in the criminalinvestigation interrogation program, the establishment of the presumption ofinnocence, freedom of confession and the right to silence require the legitimacy of theinvestigation and interrogation methods. Interrogation of criminal suspects is animportant process in criminal proceedings, and deceptive interrogation is one of themost important interrogation tactics, but China’s Criminal Procedure Law and relevantjudicial interpretations of legislative attitude of deceptive interrogation twists andturns, has experienced the process of a recognition of its legitimacy from a completedenial to the relatively permission. Although the protection of human rights and fightcrime are important, even more important, however, to protect the human rights of thecriminal suspect and at the same time we can’t all have infringed upon theinterrogation methods which are negation of the criminal suspect’s human rights, ifthese methods are correctly used, these methods can also play a role within the scopeof the law. Laws on deceptive interrogation should be allowable, not all of thedeceptive methods of interrogation are detrimental to the legitimacy, nor is theoccurrence of deceptive interrogation methods would deprive the free will of suspectsand lead to false confessions, legitimacy within the limits of deceptive interrogationmethods to be legitimate and effective access to the suspect confessed, the confessionobtained not only have the evidence of ability, of great significance to theadvancement of the entire criminal proceeding, but also better able to complete thetask of the criminal proceeding “combating crime, protecting people," But deceptiveinterrogation methods like a double-edged sword, in the play its special role, at thesame time, it will bring endless harm if it beyond the legal boundaries, it will not onlyinfringe upon the legitimate rights of the criminal suspects that in interrogation, butalso damage the image of the country and respect for the law, so, it is necessary tomade in line with the legal legitimacy of the definition of deceptive interrogationmethods, in order to maximize the profit and avoid losses.First of all, the paper analyze the deceptive interrogation by the method of overall value analysis. On the base of concept of description of deceptiveinterrogation, from the negative side, analyze the reason why deceptive interrogationmethods in various countries’ legislation are severely restricted or prohibited. Then,from the front side analyze the admissibility of deceptive interrogation methods,namely, the reason why it is controversial but still exist in the interrogation methods.Secondly, in allusion to the behalf of the states of Continental law system andCommon law system, to make a comparative law study on deceptive interrogation,summed up the major developed countries on deceptive interrogation methods’permissible boundaries. The two legal systems on behalf of the state and deceptivemethods of interrogation to totally negate the legislative attitude, but to give the legalspace of its existence, through the analysis of the existing provisions of thesecountries can play a reference to China.Thirdly, the paper focuses on the legal boundaries of the main use of deceptionin the interrogation practice. No matter what kind of deceptive interrogation methods,more or less suppressed the freedom of the will of the person questioned, the authorproceed from the most commonly used methods of deception in the interrogationpractice a detailed analysis of the use of deceptive methods of interrogation of avariety of representative boundaries, which means, spoofing methods, the repressionof freedom of the person questioned is relatively the will to grasp to what extent canbe tolerated by the law. At the same time, the circumstances under which the use ofdeceptive methods of interrogation to obtain confessions is lawful and valid evidence,evidence of statements obtained under what circumstances to exclude illegal evidenceexclusion rules. The author makes each are discussed.Finally, the paper analyze the attitude of the current legislation on deceptiveinterrogation, as well as the reform trend of Criminal Procedure, and thought ofdeceptive interrogation system as a starting point. Departure from the principle of theuse of deceptive interrogation methods, combined with this article as well as existinglegal boundaries of deceptive interrogation research, legal limits on deceptiveinterrogation methods for the specific design of the relevant legal provisions, to betterplay the deceptive methods of interrogation values in the practice of interrogation, inthe form of specific legal provisions to the effective regulation, while avoidingdisadvantages play the advantages of the deceptive methods of interrogation in theinterrogation practice.