The Study Of Litigant’s Statements

Litigant’s statements in the traditional theory is regarded as an independent form of evidence, the one -dimension evidence function only play a role in proving the fact in case, but the law in force only have the rough regulations of litigant’s statements and the specific operating regulations are missing. In practice, since the litigant has a direct stake with the case, people often consider that litigant’s statements are not credible. In addition, it is difficult to distinguish advocates, excuse, self-admission, emotional discourse and statements as evidence from the litigant’s statements under the existing legislation, which led to the marginalization of litigant’s statements’ independent evidence function, let alone other functions to be achieve.In this paper, the author focuses on the situation that theoretical field and practice circle’s cognition to the concept and classification of litigant’s statements are still unclear, so the author will analysis it at the beginning of this paper. Thereafter, the paper combs the evolution of litigant’s statements’function in our country, analyses the conflict and disjointed condition between existing relevant legal regulations about litigant’s statements and debate doctrine’s lawsuit system. Secondly, focusing on the litigant’s statements under the debate doctrine’s lawsuit system, through in-depth study of comparative law to analyze its lawsuit system, including the required functions of the litigant’s statements, specific system settings, the background reasons and the current system operating efficiency, in hope benefit to theory and practice of our country. Finally, starting with the necessary of reshaping the system of litigant’s statements, combining China’s current situation, the author try to discuss how to reshape it in on theory.