Research On The Application Of Administrative Law Enforcement Evidence In Criminal Procedure

In 2012, the applicability of administrative law enforcement evidence to criminal procedure was explicitly stated in Item 2, Article 52 of Law of Criminal Procedure. Thereafter, scholars have developed different theoretical viewpoints as to how to apply the legal provisions to transform evidence. The legal provisions have theoretically removed institutional barriers to the application of administrative law enforcement evidence in criminal procedure; however, due to the unspecific statement, there exist numerous difficulties during practical evidence concordance and application. As a result, hidden worries about judicial justice have emerged, in which the most worrying point is that detection behavior belonging in criminal procedure has been early completed in administrative law enforcement stage. The differences between administrative law enforcement evidence and criminal justice evidence are the subjects and procedure of evidence collecting, the objects of proof, and the standard of proof. Problems in evidence concordance are substandard evidence collecting procedures, difficulty in transforming evidence and risks of being misused. Individual differences in evidence application between enforcement of different administrative laws also exist. Therefore, for evidence concordance and application in judicial practices, it is necessary to strengthen the applicable rules of different types of evidence and rules for examining evidence. Impossibility to obtain again and invulnerability to human factors shall be deemed as the basis for the eligibility of administrative evidences as criminal evidences. With respect to the physical evidences meeting this basis, stress shall be laid on the review of the legitimacy of the evidence collectors, the evidence obtaining procedures and the evidence obtaining means, and also on the review of the objectivity and relevance of such evidences. Testimonial evidences shall be treated separately because stated testimonial evidences such as witness testimonies are generally obtainable again and vulnerable to human factors; therefore, they shall be generally collected again, with direct application as the exception. Administrative authentication opinions are professional and scientific special testimonial evidences, and they shall be allowed to be used as evidences in criminal proceedings; administrative authentication opinions shall be reviewed differently from the review of physical evidences: their legitimacy, objectivity and relevance shall be strictly reviewed, and the issuers issuing administrative authentication opinions shall be cross-examined in court, and expert assessors shall be invited to make professional judgments and interrogate the authentication. The linkage between administrative evidences and criminal judicial evidences shall be improved in practice, and it is advisable to establish the evidence material sharing platform, elaborate the system for the recording of evidence threads and strengthen the system for appearance in court. Through the improvement of a series of supporting mechanisms, the normativity of the linkage between administrative evidences and criminal judicial evidences will be enhanced.