On The Procedural Protection Of The Parties’ Civil Rights To Gather Evidence

Since1980’, the trail mode reform of civil procedure has been carried out with vigor andvitality, the keystone of which is about evidence. As the reform advances forward, the parts’ proofburden is increasingly strengthened, while the leading status of the court investigation becomes athing of past. The aggrandizement of parties’ right of procedural safeguard not only embody therespect for the party as a principal part, but also effect the testimonial procedure, and then the trialresult; yet the fact is that the procedural protection for the parties’ rights of collecting evidence isstill too vulnerable to give a play to the civil litigation mechanism to some extent. Against such abackdrop, discussion on how to strengthen the procedural safeguard of parties’ right to collectingevidence seems more immediate. The thesis revolves around the improvement of the proceduralprotection, analyze the problems existing in the civil procedure, and put forward the composition ofthe improvement the procedural protection of parties’ right to collecting evidence, drawing uponthe useful experience and try of foreign countries. The full thesis is divided to four parts:Introduction: First all, this part present the history of parties’ rights to collecting evidencebriefly, and then introduce the paper’s significance and the researching methods.Chapter1: summarize the development situation of parties’ evidence-collection. In this part,the author reviews the history of wanes and waxes of evidence-collection of both the court and theparties, at the same time, enumerates the current main means of evidence-collection for the parties.Chapter2: analyze the problems existing in the process of parties’ collecting evidence. Theimbalance of the intensification of burden of proof and the deficiency of the procedural safeguardmake the parties face a dilemma in collecting evidence. This part presents kinds of problems in theevidence-collecting from the angle of collecting physical evidence, witness testimony andinformation exchange etc.Chapter3: borrow the useful experience from the developed counties. Owing to differencesof procedural modes and judicial traditions, there are some differentiations in the proceduralsafeguard of parties’ rights to colleting evidence in the two legal system countries. Comparison ofboth similarities and differentiations of main counties and their reform trend help us draw eachother’s merits.Chapter4: conceive the improvement of procedural protection of parties’ rights to collectingevidence. On the basis of current conditions, judicial practices and experiences of foreign laws, thischapter represents a concrete composition of regulation of investigation warrant, establishment of collecting procedure of witness testimony, the improvement of rules of evidence exchange etc. inorder to enhance the parties’ ways and means to collect evidence.Conclusion: the author reaffirms the intention of writing this thesis, thereby call for moreattentions on the protection of parties rights to collecting evidence approaching the revision of newcivil procedure.This thesis analyzes the concerned rules and correspondent changes, through methods ofcomparative and normative analysis, so as to reveal the dissatisfactions in the collecting systems.Drawing the advanced concepts and experiences from foreign countries, it put forward concreteconception protect the parties’ rights to collecting evidence through operations of procedure, reliefmeasures and sanctions, while guarantee the parties’ smooth collection by stressing the court’s rightof command, sanction and control.