An Empirical Analysis Of The Residential Confinement At A Designated Residence That The Public Security Authority Applies

Since residential confinement at a designated residence has been modified and improved in the newly ratified Criminal Procedural Law, the institutional connotation and attribute of the system changed.This article study residential confinement at a designated residence from the perspective of the public security authority about application conditions, decision procedure, execution procedure and supervision, by looking at the cases files, individual interviews and other methods to discover the value of the compulsory measure for the public security authority investigation, the difficulties in the implementation and the problems arising from the application etc. In the end, the author puts forward some advice to improve the residential confinement at a designated residence that the public security authority applies in the base of the research situation and combining with the relevant regulations and the theory of procedure law. Besides the introduction, there are three parts in this thesis.The first part is an empirical survey about the residential confinement at a designated residence that the public security authority applies. From the macroscopic aspect, local public security authorities have taken different measures in order to adapt to the newly ratified Criminal Procedural Law, including developing the detailed the specification of implementation; issuing the normative documents with the courts or the procuratorates jointly; building special places and related facilities; holding joint conferences with the courts and the procuratorates; organizing policemen participate in related training, etc. In general, the application rate of this measure is low. The main types of the cases are property invasion crimes and non-violent crimes. In practice, this measure brings into play in four different ways, including a detention alternative measure, a supplementary measure of detention, a means of investigation of the case and a supplementary measure of bail. Designated residences present the following characteristics:special place has not been established; hotels and ordinary houses are mainly selected as designated residences; execution authorities tend to choose fixed places; the management of residences is not unified; arrangements for accomplices’ residences are random. The way of criminal suspects being oversaw mainly presents the following features: taking close monitoring, random inspecting by telephone and random inspecting by coming to designated residence are most common way; the mandatory of monitoring is flexible; under different way of monitoring, the freedom of the person who is under residential confinement has big differences. When notifying the family members, the policemen do not inform address of the designated residence. The supervision and restriction for the public security organ is mainly internal administrative approval and law enforcement quality assessment, while the supervision from people’s procuratorates lack.The second part is about the problems about the residential confinement at a designated residence that the public security authority applies. Problems about application provisions include that the application provisions are not clear; it cannot meet the reasonable needs in practice as no fixed residence is the only precondition. In the decision procedure, reasoning and argumentation lack in internal administrative approval. There are many problems in enforcement procedure. The selection and management of a designated residence is in confusion, and the provision about the mode of monitoring is unclear. Related equipment of electronic monitoring have not yet been allocated and installed. Obligations that a criminal suspect under residential confinement shall comply with are too tough. There is high risk that a designated residence become "a place specially used for handling cases", etc. Absence of procuratorial supervision and inefficiency of the criminal suspect rights are outstanding problems in supervision and restriction mechanism.The third part is about the advice for future reform. The application condition and decision procedure should be improved by further clarifying application conditions; further clarifying the content of "not arrested, but comply with the requirements for residential confinement" and specifying the connotation of the "fixed residence". The enforcement procedure should be reformed by strengthening the construction and management of designated places; clarifying the way of monitoring. In principle, a designated residence shall not be used as interrogation room. When notifying the family members, the specified residence address should be included. The rights and obligations during execution should be clear. When it comes to external supervision, the author advocates that strengthening procuratorial supervision and the protection of rights of criminal suspects is necessary.