The Choice Of The Liability Of Telling The Truth Or "Lying Immunity"

Right to silence is no longer fresh discussion in academia, but discussion on regulation on defendants’ lies after they chose to give up the right to silence is very scarce. I believe that the different regulations on defendants’ lies would produce a negligible impact on the conviction and sentencing and human rights protection. Therefore, this is an essential topic to explore and research the defendant’s right to lie.Throughout the criminal procedure legislation of countries, there are two different systems of regulation on defendants’ lies in interrogations presided by a judge:one is the countries of Anglo-American law regulations of the state, once the defendant choose to give up silent right and select statements, he would be the witness identity, at the same time also has the liability of telling the truth of witness, otherwise will be disciplined by perjury; another is the provision of civil law countries, the defendant is not punished because of false confessions and perjury, equivalent to entitle one a "lying immunity". This paper is compare the two different regulation pattern analysis, to have a deeper understanding to it.This article is divided into three parts altogether, respectively is:the first chapter is summary of the basic theory of "the liability of telling the truth" and "lying immunity". Including the analysis of this understanding of the concepts and value of the two functions; the second chapter is the specific evolution, the display of legislation and judicial practice of "the liability of telling the truth" and "lying immunity" in two legal systems, as well as the causes of differences between the two selected for analysis; last chapter by comparing with the previous analysis, combining the basic situation of China’s judicial system, and then think about lying to the defendants’ behavior in our country should adopt the way, and to be discussed by the legislative and judicial levels.