The Perfection Of Criminal Evidence Disclosure Mechanism In China

Starting from the concept of criminal evidence disclosure,this paper compares evidence disclosure mechanism at home with abroad and state this mechanism’s present situation and defects in our country,then point out the necessity and feasibility of the evidence disclosure mechanism applied in our country. According to our country’s special litigation pattern,existing rules of procedure and the theory basis for the development of evidence disclosure, perfect an evidence disclosure mechanism suitable for the situation of our country.The first part mainly elaborated the basic theory of the evidence disclosure.Evidence disclosure discussed in this paper not only includes the evidence exchange progress before the trial involved by the government, defense lawyer and the judge. But also includes in the trial process the responsibility to continue disclosure by two sides.The second part mainly discusses the comparison of foreign evidence disclosure mechanism and the enlightenment. Through the comparison between three countries Britain, the United States, Japan in the aspects of content,open procedures, disciplinary actions, etc,You can see the background of our country and abroad to build evidence disclosure mechanism is completely different. In order to make both parties to fight based on the more realistic case,they have the mechanism abroad,, well,getting a trial mode that aims at a substantialized trial based on court trial evidence is our target,so we need the mechanism urgently.The third part mainly explains our existing evidence disclosure mechanism and its defects.Based on "Criminal Procedural Law" in1996,the lawyers have acquired the legal access to the relevant files in the procuratorate. Since the promulgation of the new "Criminal Procedural Law" in2012, the defense lawyer has been obliged to disclose the evidence that they hold. Which initially formed a bidirectional evidence disclosure pattern,but has not been standardized and coordination. It still lack standardized procedures and the subsequent punishment measures.At the same time it also has other aspects of flaws,file material transferred before the court cause the conflict between lawyer’s right to be informed and judge preconceived. The conflicts between operability and limited to inform obligation by defense lawyers, we have the fause procedures before the trail." Conference system before the court" setting is also flawed. What’s more,evidence disclosure produces a variety of problems in the pilot work.The forth part mainly discusses how to construct a criminal disclosure mechanism witch conforms to the national conditions. Perfecting the criminal evidence disclosure mechanism has the necessity and feasibility.Disclosing evidence is conducive to the implementation of the principle of equality,promoting justice, improving litigation efficiency, saving the cost of justice and finding the case facts.Disclosing evidence is helpful in determining the potency of the evidence in advance, summarizing the focuses of dispute, confirming the list of witnesses to appear in court, clarifying the due responsibilities of violating the disclosing procedures, getting ready for the formal hearing, and finally, realizing the substantialization of the court trial. The theoretical research of criminal procedural law provides the theoretical basis of disclosure proceedings.The existing legal system provides legislative basis for the establishment of discovery proceedings. From a macro level, the objective need in the judicial practice provides a practical basis for disclosure mechanism. Exploring its own path somewhere between the inquisitorial system and the adversary system, shifting from a files-and records-centered trial mode to one that aims at a substantialized trial based on court trial evidence are the fundamental purpose of disclosing evidence. Criminal evidence disclosure mechanism of our country adopts the principle of mutual disclosure,party autonomy principle,judicial review principle.The responsibility to disclose for the government and defense lawyers are unequal. The government has the obligation to full disclosure, and the defendants shall have the obligation to disclose a certain extent content. The government,defense and judge decide whether to start the disclosure process. The government and the defense can apply for opening of discovery proceedings. Or judges consider it is necessary can also open the program.The fifth part mainly discusses the matching rules of evidence disclosure mechanism The judge has the command and the jurisdiction Judges have the right to judicial review in the problems such as violation of procedure of the consequences, new evidence, the exception to the rule, illegal evidence exclusion.