Study On System Of Investigators To Testify In Court

The criminal procedure law of People's Republic of China has been amended in 2012,the fifty-seventh clause stipulated for the first time in our country's criminal procedure law to require investigators to testify in court.Investigators appearing in the court is the requirement of the direct verbal principle,the protection of criminal defendant's right to confrontation and finding the truth.Moreover,personal experience of investigators testifying in court could help them consciously regulate investigation behavior,implement the Illegal Evidence Exclusionary Rule,facilitate the essentialism of court trial,promote the normalization of relation between investigation organ and judicial organ gradually,achieve the goal of trial-centered mechanism.However,the system of investigators testifying in court has not been fully implemented since its establishment in China.In judicial practice,investigators usually use “presentations of condition” instead of testifying in court.Forcing the investigators to testify in court is also not possible to implement.Besides,even if investigators testifying in court,the testification quality is not very high,and even the case of perjury exists.It is believed that these problems exists for both subjective and objective reasons.On the one hand,China's judicial organ was accustomed to relying on archives in ruling cases,which is convenient and efficient for both investigation organ and judicial organ.In addition,as the investigation organ in most cases,public security organ occupied an important position for a long time,so it's almost impossible to force investigators to testify in court.Lack of reply skills appearing in court or the limitation of human memory may also lead to low quality of testification in court.On the other hand,investigators did not completely change privilege thought,they cannot correctly handle the relationship between investigation and trial,they repel inquiries from the judicial organ and the defender in court,they would even perjure in court to preserve the interests of their own and the investigation organ.Also,they don't want to waste too much time in court and influence their performance appraisal.By studying the investigators testifying in the court system of some other countries,to improve this system,it is necessary to start with the reality and practical operation.First of all,the principles and scopes of investigators testifying in court should be clarified.Next,it's required to strengthen the training of testify in court of the investigators purposively.Then,to press investigators,it would be helpful to stipulate the procedural consequences without fulfilling the testification obligation and perform internal sanctions in investigation organs.Although this system was studied constantly since its establishment,the efficiency of enhancement is not considerably good.There are still many problems to be solved in practice.Therefore,the author synthesizes the existing research results and puts forward some new opinions.Firstly,the detail issues of investigators testifying in court were focused but not the classification of different types or definition of the status as usual.Secondly,it is opposed to revise the postposition principle of the state compensation liability and setting up the protection measures for investigators.It is hoped that we can further study and examine the system of investigators testifying in court,so as to proceed its practical implementation and achieve our procedural justice and judicial justice.