Research On The Material Reading Right Of The Accused

In order to guarantee a fair trial, and endow the legal state in participating a meaningful procedure, the court must ensure the accused making powerful statements directly about the judgment in modern legal society. One of the accused’s legal rights is the Advisory Request which is considered to be the legal basis of the right of reading material. The right of reading material belongs to the defendant party and it offers an insight to the accused to relevant files and evidence in different degrees. Thus, the accused can asking for informing of vital information, such as files and evidence in a criminal case which is relevant with their interests.In contrast with civil law system, common law system countries try to protect the right of reading material by the rule of evidence disclosure before trial which is regarded as a comprehensive right of reading files in criminal case. Because of the influence from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), countries of the two legal system basically recognize the right of reading materials of the accused after a debate for decades. In this way, the system for accused people fully exercise the right to defend, maintaining the accused person’s benefit and the application status. As a result, the thinking of allocate the right of reading materials only to defense lawyers is "putting the cart before the horse". Through the learning of the right of reading materials in foreign countries, it is obvious that differences lie in the system such as reading time, reading content, exception of reading right and etc.See the essence through the phenomena, the similarities and differences between the formations are not accidental. On the one hand, it is the result of the benefit measure between different lawsuit systems, which the traditional continental law system countries emphasis the guarantee of national public power while common law countries pay more attention to the maintenance of the procedure itself especially the difference of discovery time, scope. On the other hand, the similarities and differences caused by different detection modes. Monorail system investigation pattern which accused person also have no right to, and to put up with investigators interrogation and investigation is an investigation organ directed by the state exclusive indictment, objective to gather evidence for or against the accused person material, investigation agencies, however, the accused person’s status in the investigation is not completely equal. In addition, the litigious rights of the accused person have also been restricted. The double-track surveillance pattern refers to activities conducted by official and private investigators respectively, they respectively from belong to and/or services in the prosecution and defense, this model adopted the "two legs" investigation approach, emphasizes the accused person and equality on the status of the investigation organ, antagonism. This mode use discovery system in order to ensure the lawsuit efficiency. Finally, the similarities and differences are also affected by the file system which the two kinds of transferring files lead to different countries the right to read right to exercise time and read on the difference between the request object, leading to different countries exercise time on material reading right and the difference of marking the right request object.However, in the theory of our traditional criminal procedure, the right of reading material is regarded as the rights for defense lawyer in "the criminal procedure law"(1997),"the lawyer law"(2007), the newly revised "the criminal procedure law"(2012) and other related laws and regulations. Recently, with Li Zhuang Case (Li Zhuang. a former criminal defense lawyer who violate the criminal law in Chongqing’s Anti-criminal movement) as a turning point, our country launched a discussion of the right to reading material of the accused.Influenced by the traditional civil law of Germany and Japan, China accused the material reading right is composed of the defendant’s counsel to exercise, but this view in China seems to be a deprivation of premise of the right which still exist defects, the tensions with defenders. Therefore, in China it still need to protect the reading right of people being prosecuted. Realize marking right ownership regression, the establishment of our country being prosecuted people marking system under the rule of law construction and the rights of the subject of litigation of our country play a major significance. Realizing the structure on the ownership of the right to reading material of return, if China build a system of accused person’s reading right, it should under the rule of law construction and the rights of the subject of litigation is of great significance. We must reform criminal procedure of our country, read the request object, marking scope of the time and place, and marking the scope of the perfect, as well as to the reading right of exception to rules. It shall be clear and in order to better improve our being prosecuted people in criminal procedure system.