Study On The System Of Testifying For Investigators

In criminal justice, it shall have an irreplaceable value to be testified by investigators. The Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China(2012 Amendment)(hereinafter referred to as the “Criminal Procedure Law”) confirmed the system of testifying for our investigators. Theoretically, it shall change the situation that investigators seldom testify in the past. However, in practice, investigators may often issue “presentations of condition” to supplement the chain of evidence, so as to avoid from the obligation of testifying that should have undertaken by them. In fact, most of presentations of condition” don't belong to one of categories of legal evidence. It adopted in quantity shall easily propagate a great number of malpractices. The new Criminal Procedure Law and related judicial explanations also have relatively scattered and abstract regulations on the system of testifying for investigators, and are short of specific operational detailed rules and regulations to support. The difficulties of testifying by investigators not only have factors of legislations, but also have obstacles in system, court trial and ideology, etc. In the process of improving the system of testifying for our investigators, it shall not copy foreign experience and practice completely, but it should keep a foothold on the situation of China and juridical practice to conduct reasonable construction. Based on restricting the utilization of “presentations of condition”, it should also specify the identity of testifying by investigators, limit the scope of testifying by investigators and synchronize related security system, etc., so as to ensure that the system of testifying for our investigators should be feasible.From the perspective of insufficient “presentations of condition” in criminal files, the paper conducts an analysis and discussion on the system of testifying for investigators. The main contents are summarized as follows: after testifying by investigators is summarized, it raises a question, indicating that “presentations of condition” used by investigators frequently in practice replace the obligation of testifying. Then it analyzes the attribute evidence for “presentations of condition” and existing malpractices by using “presentations of condition” to replace the obligation of testifying. Next, it conducts rough researches on law-making stipulations and practice situations on the system of testifying for investigators treated by two law systems, so as to provide certain reference significance for exploring the system of testifying for investigators that conforms to the situation of China. In view of our practical situation, it shows that the system of testifying for current investigators mainly has disputes on the identity, and conducts an analysis on the reason for difficult system of testifying for our investigators. At last, based on our juridical practice, it proposes some countermeasures and recommendations on constructing and perfecting the system of testifying for our investigators reasonably, from the perspectives of identity positioning, scope of testifying and system safeguard, etc.