Research On Application Of The Corroboration Of Confession Rule

As a legal device of restricting the weight of confession, the corroboration of confessionrule means that the accused cannot be found guilty if there is only confession but no otherevidence, unless the confession is confirmed by some other evidence. The functions ofprotecting human rights and finding real case of the corroboration of confession rule makes itvaluable in theory and practice. But it’s not enough for the execution of the rule that there isonly principled regulation, then the newly promulgated “Capital Case Evidence Rules” article34and “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court of Criminal Procedural Law” article106clearly stipulate the application of the corroboration of confession rule. Therefore, the studyof the application of the rule has great theoretical and practical significance.The article consists of three parts: introduction, body and conclusion. And the body ismade up of four sections. Based on the introduction which puts forward the necessity of theapplication of the corroboration of confession rule and the urgency of the furtherimprovement of the rule, the body has discussed the evolution and background of thelegislation, interpreted the constitutive elements of the applicable stipulation, analyzed theproblems of the rule from the perspective of comparative law, and gave some suggestions toimprove the new applicable stipulation at the end of the article. The body includes thefollowing parts:First section generally introduces the corroboration of confession rule. This section hasput forward an idea that the corroboration of confession rule in China has been established inCriminal Procedure Law in1979, and absorbed by the later Amendments. Furthermore, itpoints out the background of the new applicable stipulation, which includes the limitation ofthe principled regulation of the rule, judicial tradition of emphasizing confession and practicerequirements for judges trying cases. Thus it analyzes the inevitability and rationality of thelegislation of the new rule.Section two has correctly understood the constitutive elements of the newly applicablestipulation. This section is based on the research of the first section, to give out the author’sunderstandings of the new rule. Specifically, article106includes the scope of confessionwhich need to be corroborated, the legitimacy of the acquisition process of the confession, thecontents of corroboration including all the elements of corpus delicti, and the provision of conviction which is the legal effect of the application of the rule.Section three has analyzed the problems of the new applicable stipulation. The problemsincludes:(a) the scope of confession which need to be corroborated has not involved thesuspect’s confession and accomplice’s confession,(b) the scope of the proof of corroborativeevidence includes all the elements of corpus delicti but has not distinguished the seriousnessof different cases,(c) the competency and weight of corroborative evidence has been notcovered by the rule, and (d) the provision of conviction is irrationally.Section four puts forward the suggestions to improve the new applicable stipulation, andthe notes in the judicial practice. First, to solve the problems of constitutive elements of theapplicable stipulation, the following suggestions should be adopted:(a) making the scope ofconfession which need to be corroborated, which should include the suspect’s confession andaccomplice’s confession,(b) there is no need to confirm the identity between the accused andoffender in all criminal cases,(c) special requirements for competency of the corroborativeevidence should include different sources, but exclude accomplices’ confession,(d) theproblem of weight of corroborative evidence should be stipulated that the combination ofcorroborative evidence and corroborated confession is enough prove the case facts. Second,the provision of “can find the accused guilty” should be modified to “conditionally to find theaccused guilty”. Third, the rule should stipulate the identity exception and proviso exceptionof the applicable stipulation. Fourth, the details of the legislative expression should becorrected, it is also should be put forward to the complete legislative expression of theapplicable stipulation. Finally, the article offers some proposals for the possible problems injudicial practice.