An Empirical Study On The Implementation Of The Exclusionary Rules Of Illegally Obtained Evidence At Arrest Reviewed Stage

As a procedure law, in addition to take the responsibility to guarantee the implementation of substantive law, Criminal Procedure Law also has its own unique value of the pursuit, one of which is to protect human rights. In differing from what Substantive criminal law does to the protection of human rights,the Criminal Procedure Law focus on the protection of the suspects and defendants,and the exclusionary rule precisely reflects this tendency. American people firstly combine the admissibility of evidence with the protection of human rights,and after more than two centuries of development, the exclusionary rule matures. Functional principle of the exclusionary rule is that evidence collected by the investigating authorities will lose the ability,in that case,the interests of illegal acts will be destroyed,the investigating authorities will finally abandon the illegal intent. The Criminal Procedure Law in 1979 had already showed a negative assessment of the evidence of illegal behavior, after two criminal procedure law, this position has never been changed. After the modification of the new Criminal Procedure Law in 2012, the exclusionary rule was established. Compared with the countries establishing exclusionary rule previously, besides the judges at the trial stage, prosecutors and investigative agencies also have the power to exclude the illegal evidence. As the "suspects" of collecting illegally obtained evidence, whether the investigating authorities are willing to cancel the illegal evidence is still a question.As the Procuratorial organs,prosecutors in the investigation stage are mainly responsible for the examination and approval arrests,so it is really necessary to study applicable conditions of the exclusionary rule at this stage. Arrest is the most severe coercive measures, all meet the conditions of arrest would be deprived of their liberty in the short term, in order to apply the arrest accurately, the prosecutors should weigh every condition of arrest cautiously. Considering every condition of the arrest, the evidence is no doubt the basic one,so applying the exclusionary rule accurately should be in a key stage of the review of the arrest.At the same time, with the exclusion rules, the procedures of review of arrest can be used as pre-trial procedures for judging evidence in advance, so that indirectly ensure a fair trial.All in all, everything we mentioned beyond will be good for the protection of human rights by the prosecution service. In addition, the exclusion of illegal evidence during the stage of review of the arrest will work to some extent,prevent the occurrence of injustice, and ensure an early detection of the facts of the case.To explore the situation of excluding illegally obtained evidence in the review of arrest, the author makes an empirical study. In our country, the number of serious crimes suspects is quite small, that means objectively the authorities will not be forced to handle the illegal investigation in most cases, and accordingly, the exclusionary rule will not be applied in most cases. Nevertheless, the garble between defective evidence and illegal obtained evidence affect the application of illegal evidence exclusion rules. At the same time, repeated confessions and evidence derived existence weakens the exclusionary rule's deterrent effect on the investigating authorities. The relationship between police and prosecutors which shows a clear tendency of prosecution makes the prosecutors lack of initiative power to exclude illegal evidence in the stage of arrest, and the limited channels of informing the existence of illegal obtained evidence are also lower the possibilities which the suspects fighting for their freedom with the help of exclusion rules. In order to ensure the application of the exclusionary rule in the Examination of Arrest smoothly, firstly the writer suggests that the definition of illegal evidence and related concepts should be clarified to prevent the substantive departments fleeing to the related conceptions because of the careless legal texts. Secondly, we should eliminate the contradictory role of prosecution to make the prosecutors make the independent decision when judging evidence in the stage of review of arrest. Finally, we should strengthen the supporting system and the right to defense of the suspect, in order to ensure the defense to play its due role in the review of the arrest work.