The Validity Of The Criminal Interrogation And Inquiry Transcripts In Civil Proceedings

In civil procedure,the parties submit the interrogation and inquiry transcripts in the criminal proceedings to the civil court as evidence for supporting their claims or refuting the other's views.However,the current civil procedure law and judicial interpretation of our country do not stipulate this evidence,which leads to the fact that both parties in practice have disputes over the validity of the evidence in such transcripts,and judges are also facing an irreversible situation.Therefore,we need to further explore whether the question of criminal interrogation and inquiry can be used as evidence and how to prove it.In accordance with the structure of the case analysis,this paper analyzes the evidence effect of criminal interrogation and inquiry in civil proceedings.The text of this article is divided into four parts,with a total of more than 31,000 words.The first part is case analysis.The author selected the case of dispute between Anglo Chinese Aluminum and Xinbo Investment Secured Recovery Right.According to the fact cognizance and applicable law of People's Court in first instance,second instance and retrial,the dispute focus was concluded.Namely,the validity of the inquiry transcript of the case involved,ie,whether it has the competence of evidence and the probative force of evidence and how to determine them.The second part is the legal analysis of the validity of criminal interrogation and inquiry transcripts.Through the analysis of theory of the competence of evidence and probative force of evidence,it is demonstrated that the elements of the competence of evidence and probative force of evidence that affect criminal interrogation and inquiry transcripts are: the formal relevance,the formal authenticity and legitimacy of the competence of evidence and the substantial authenticity,the substantial relevance of the probative force of evidence.The third part is the case analysis and conclusions.For the dispute focus,I analyzed that the inquiry transcript of the case had the competence of evidence and probative force of evidence.At the same time,I pointed out that the lack of evidence guidance and procedural guarantees appeared in the judgment of validity in this case.The fourth part of the case inspired.On one hand,to improve the rules of evidence system from the legislative perspective.In view of the problems existing in the use of evidence and the identification of the facts in the civil procedure,the corresponding rules ofcompetence of evidence and probative force are designed.Strict evidence competence rules are used to limit the eligibility of evidence.After the exceptions that meet the hearsay rule and then through the review of illegal evidence exclusion rules,the use of evidence of reinforcement in evidence is used to reasonably govern the facts of judges using transcripts.On the other hand,from the procedural point of view,the litigation certification activities should be implemented in a corresponding system.In order to ensure the effective operation of evidence rules,the discretion of judges in adopting and accepting such transcripts should be reasonably restricted.We can strictly implement the system of representation of relevant personnel in court,promote the substantive reform of the trial,and strengthen the argumentation and reasoning of the judgment documents.