Research On The System Of Dossier Transfer In Criminal Public Prosecution

The style of criminal public prosecution that is endpoint of investigation procedure and openpoint of trial procedure plays a decisive role in criminal procedure, which is connected with investigation procedure and trial procedure. The system of dossier transfer in criminal public prosecution is the bottleneck that restricts the reform of the criminal-justice system in our country. However, the system of dossier transfer in criminal public prosecution has been ignored for a long time. Especially the shortcoming of the system of dossier transfer in criminal public prosecution has never been quantified. The problem of the system of dossier transfer in criminal public prosecution is prejudgment, biased even trial hollow through judges review dossiers in pretrial. Judges exercise criminal poewr of discretion by reading dossiers in secret, unilateral office environment, so that the rules set up for trial become a mere formality. It is the keystone of this dissertation that how to reduce the bias, personality, prognostic impact on the judicial activities, so as to ensure the objectivity and neutrality of judge, the basic rights of the criminal suspects and defendants.This dissertation is about thirty-nine thousand words and divides into five parts. The first part of the dissertation expounds some threories about the system of dossier transfer in criminal public prosecution, including the concept, the importance and the classification. Then, this dissertation analysises and discusses the value pursuit and teases the change of the system of dossier transfer in criminal public prosecution.The second part analyzes the causes of formation of the system of dossier transfer in criminal public prosecution in our country from two dimensions, including the immediate causes and the root causes. The immediate causes includes the three causes.Firstly, the prosecution control the entire trial through the investigation files. Secondly, the lawyer is difficult to spread virtual effective defense. Thirdly, the judge isn’t familiar with the files and hards to host the trial better during the court trial. The root causes includes the three causes. Firstly, criminal procedure take"objective reality"as the value goal. Secondly,criminal procedure structure take the power of investigation as the center. Thirdly, court trial tradition take the dossier as the center. Fourth, judicial discretion mechanism take secret administrative examination and approval as the center.The third part explores the problem of prejudge from the angles of law and psychology. The system of dossier transfer easily becomes a mere formality, violates the procedural rights of the accused on the premise of the rules of evidence has not been fully implemented. In psychology research part analysis four questions, including whether prejudge exists or not, how prejudge operates, what kinds of influence prejudgment will bring, how to eliminate the negative effects brought about by the anchoring effect, which provide constructive references for solving the problem of judge’s prejudgment in criminal trial.The fourth part makes a comparative study of the style of dossier transfer. It has concluded that no matter that adversary system or ex officio doctrine, they both pursit to establish review mechanism for public prosecution, establish the system of evidence display, achieve substantial trial and improve the trial efficiency. Two modes have a difference in realization approach.The fifth part is the key content of this dissertation, which research how to solve the problems of judge’s prejudgment. Firstly, this part analysis two theorial problem:the relationship between justice and efficiency, the relationship between the due process and the substantive truth. Secondly, this dissertation adopts the research path that "theory of evolution" and "localization" and believes that "the indictment-only doctrine" and the system of the division of judge and trial judge isn’t operative in our criminal judicial circumstance. Implementing the rules of evidence is a fundamental solution to weaken the judge’s prejudgment. At last, this part formulate some measures to weaken prejudgment from the perspective of substantive trial. Perfecting the rules of attendance of witness, the rules of evidence to confirm each other, exclusionary rules of illegally obtained evidence and the court properly reserves the power of investigation belong to the measures to perfect the rules of criminal evidence. Establishing criminal precedents system, reforming the system of criminal case quality evaluation and criminal trial by administrative approval, implementing the system of sufficient explanation in judgment belong to other relevant supporting measures.