On The Disposition Of The Neutrality Of Jails In Our Country

In recent years, the abnormal death phenomenon of detained personnel in our countrydetention houses occurs frequently, which in part reflects defects of our current jailsystem,such as extended custody, prison bully, ill supervisory and so on. Many reasons leadto these phenomena, but the fundamental reason is that the status of detention houses is notneutral. Among the criminal procedure of our country, the arrested criminal suspects and thedefendants have been held in detention houses before trial, and the detention houses are underpublic security organs. It is difficult to ensure that the detention houses shall perform theirduties and the power between prosecution party and defender says contrasts more, whichmakes the legitimate rights of criminal suspects and defendants in custody suffered violationseasily. This article compares the custody places before trial in foreign countries’ criminalproceedings, and the custody places before trial in western countries are neutral under the ruleof the common practice. The neutrality of our country’s detention houses exists rationality andfeasibility. Perfecting the detention house system of our country is an important step of ourjudicial reform.This paper is divided into three parts besides the preface and ending:The first part is why the detention house should be neutral and the analysis of the neutralfeasibility in our country. First power balance requires the public security organs shall berestricted in investigation phase, and the detention houses can play this role as an independentthird party; The realization of human rights needs a neutral agency supervising the presumedinnocent persons in legal; The trend of criminal executive integration requires the detentionhouses shall be a special jail which is responsible for custody. Second, the neutrality of thedetention houses in our country can realize is feasible. The neutrality of custody places beforetrial is the trend of The Times; In the long run, it also can promote to enhance the efficiency ofinvestigation; According to the present situation, the existing system of the public securityorgan makes it possible that the detention houses separate from public security organs; Thejudicial administration departments with rich experiences of supervision can be qualified forthe supervision work.The second part: the principle of presumption is the basic principle of the moderncriminal procedure law, and the international standards require special protection for the not yet convicted criminal suspects and defendants, preventing torture and extended custody.Power expanses naturally, and once custody suspects and defendants controlled byprosecution authority, prosecution authority may abuse power, infringing their legitimaterights and interests. Now that our country has joined the relevant international conventions,we shall perform to the provisions of the convention. The places of custody before trialabroad take on three modes: the American model, the French model and the Japanese model.The three modes have a common characteristic: the criminal suspect and defendant by formaldetained are no longer to be controlled by the investigation organ, and supervised by specialcustody organization.The third part puts forward the idea of reform. First, the current criminal detentionsystem is the result of the historical changes. We have to admit the jail regulations in the20years of judicial practice have played a huge role, but it doesn’t rise to the level of law comeup, and some of these terms have not been able to adapt to the development of the judicialpractice. The unreasonable jail system has brought serious problem, no matter from theprotection of the prisoners’ rights or the management itself, but also strengthening theconfession center socialist of our detection model.It blocks our legal process. Thus the lawcalls for changes of this ownership of detention house, and its status shall be neutral. Butabout which one manages, it mainly presents three views. Through the comparison, thejudicial administrative organs shall be the most suitable for the supervision of the detentionhouse work. Finally, it needs a series of reform: first the separation between arrest andcustody separation is the premise of the separation between investigation and custody. Changecurrent arrested system, adjusting the detention for unlicensed arrested and establishing thecustody process. Necessity principle will be introduced into the custody conditions, andPrejudication judger decides whether to custody or not. Reset the deadline and conditions ofarresting, and refine arrested and detained decision programs. Second, complete theseparation between arrest and custody. The detention house is under the control of judicialadministrative agencies as a custody actuator paralleled with prison. Refine the executionprocedures of custody, and clear regulators’ responsibilities. It’s also important to strengthenthe construction of the regulators’ quality.