Remedial Rules Of The Flawed Material Evidence In Criminal Justice

With the deepening of the reform of criminal justice, the evidence rules are alsoconsummating. The remedial rules of flawed material evidence are a big step forwardof the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence. However, the New Criminal Procedurelaw of PRC and the two legislation interpreting documents only refer to this problemin principle while the detailed rules are not legislated. The rules in principle cannotfunction as panned for it is far from practice. In order to give some suggestions to thefurther legislation, this dissertation is to analysis the relevant problems through thedefinition, objects, the authority or rights and the methods of remedial rules.The first Chapter begins from the situation of the legislation to analyze andremark the process of its development. The new Criminal Procedure Law and the TwoLegislation Interpreting Documents are well remarkable. By the comparison of theclauses, it is easy to conclude its progress.The Second Chapter puts forward the problems of the relevant clauses. Byreviewing the works of Chinese scholars on these problems, the conclusion is easy todraw: the lack of detailed rules makes they are difficult to function. The saidconclusion has been proved by the judicial practice. This dissertation begins from theZhang Guoxi case to analyze this view point. It is obvious that it would take a longtime to establish the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence.The third Chapter begins from the definition of remedial rules. The comparisonbetween the remedial rules of other laws and that of Criminal Procedure law can drawthe characteristics of the remedial rules in Criminal Procedure. The elements of theremedial rules makes it is possible to definite it. Then, this chapter also analyzes the values behind the rules.The forth chapter analyzes the authorities or rights of the remedial rules. In thecriminal justice, the prosecutors shoulder the objective obligation. On one hand, theprosecutors should provide the evidence to prove the guilt of accused, one the otherhand, the prosecutors should remedy the evidences if any. The criminal investigationorgans only cooperate with the prosecutors whereas the courts are the trial part shouldaccept the complaints, raise the questions, require the prosecutors to remedy andreview the result of remedy. In this process, the rights of accused should be protected.The fifth chapter analyze the scope of remedial rules. it begins from therelationship of remedy and explanation, and puts forward that the flawed evidencesshould be initially explained. The objects of remedial rules are limited to the flawedrule, but this ideal method cannot feasible in the criminal justice. The remedial rulesshould be verified case by case.The sixth chapter tries to construct the remedial procedure of remedial rules. Thespecific rules should be established to guarantee the smooth process of criminaljustice.