The Study Of Pretrial Conference In Chinese Criminal Procedure

With the promulgation of No.182article in the new criminal procedure law, China alsoestablished a criminal pretrial conference system with Chinese characteristics, which isa significant breakthrough in our country’s criminal litigation proceedings, also theperformance of prosecution and defense confrontation’s enhancement as well as of greatsignificance for the human rights protection and crime punishment. The criminal pretrialconference procedure demonstrates the value of litigation efficiency improvement,human rights security and trial justice’s realization. In terms of increasing the efficiencyof litigation, the criminal pretrial conference could reduce the court session throughreorganizing the evidence and secure court trial’s continuity through examiningprocedural issues. On the part of protecting human rights, the criminal pretrialconference guarantees defendants’ rights by reviewing the detention period and illegalevidence exclusion. As for the realization of trial fairness, the criminal pretrialconference could secure the justice of judgments through defendant and defenders’active participation. The legislative practice about the criminal pretrial conferenceprocedures is relatively complete in overseas countries（regions）. This paper firstly takes Britainand America as examples to analyze the distinguishing features of the pretrialconference when it is under the litigant-adversary doctrine mode, meanwhile,summarizes the aspects worth learning; secondly takes France and Germany as thefocuses to sum up the legislation forms of the pretrial conference under inquisitorialsystem mode; finally analyzes the procedures of pretrial conference in Japan and ChinaTaiwan, absorbing the experience that could be used for reference. Without doubt,Chinese pretrial conference procedure has its own characteristics, which is differentfrom the overseas pretrial proceedings, nor equivalent to the Evidence Disclosure System.In all regions throughout one year, the pretrial conference is put to extensive use onjudicial practice and achieves favorable effects.However, many problems came into being because it was the first time for legislationand short of experience. For example, the efficacy of the pretrial conference is notexplicitly stipulated; the list of its application scope is not comprehensive enough; theprincipal part that presides over it is under controversy; the aspect that who should bearthe legal liability is somewhat omissive; and weather it is open to the public, the numberof times, also the meeting way are without refined rules. All the answers need to befound in theory and practice so that the factors which hinder the development of the pretrial conference will be gradually reduced. At last, the author presentedcomprehensive proposals from the following three aspects: illegal evidence exclusion,the effectiveness and legal supervision of the pretrial conference. First, the exclusion ofillegal evidence is involved in not only the fairness of the law case itself, but also thesecurity of defendant’s litigation rights. How the pretrial conference procedure shouldbe positioned and what role it plays need to be further defined by law and judicialinterpretation. Second, the efficacy of pretrial conference is the hotly debated focus forscholars. Even though for a good system, it is difficult to take effects if there is noguarantee from coercive force. Therefore, how to authorize the pretrial conference isalso one important problem needs to be solved. Finally, what can not be ignored most isthe legal supervision. Only under the legal supervision system could the pretrialconference develop further and further. In practice, the People’s Procuratorate and thepeople’s court also should change the mode of working promptly, strengthening theorystudy on pretrial conference as well as enhancing consciousness of procedures andrights. At the same time, the defender also plays an important role that involves inexercising the reading right, raising objections to procedural issues, demonstratingevidence and so on. Consequently, the corresponding system of that for defender alsoneeds to be improved. Sincerely hope this thesis could make contributions to theperfection of our country’s pretrial conference procedures and help it develop the valueit should have on the aspects of lawsuit efficiency improvement, human rights securityand trial justice’s realization.