Investigation Report On The Implementation Of "People's Court Rules For Handling Courtroom Investigation In First-instance Ordinary Criminal Trials(Provisional)"

This thesis includes four parts except for introduction and conclusion.The first part is the connection between the criminal pretrial conference and the court investigation.“The Court Investigation Procedures” stipulated that the judge can announce the result of the pretrial conference in the process of informing the litigation rights in the trial.In judicial practice,it is very important to realize the connection between pretrial conference and court investigation.Through investigating the practice of Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court,Chongqing Municipal First Intermediate People's Court,Chengdu Intermediate People's Court and Taizhou Intermediate People's Court,it has been found that Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court and Chongqing Municipal First Intermediate People's Court were not pilot courts of the “Three regulations”.The effect of applying the pretrial conference was not satisfactory.The pretrial conference system cannot play the function of“improving litigation efficiency and guaranteeing trial quality”.However,The Chengdu Intermediate People's Court and the Taizhou Intermediate People's Court were the pilot courts of the “Three Regulations”.They had accumulated relatively mature experience and widely applied the pretrial conference to deal with procedural issues and some substantive issues,better realized the connection between pretrial meeting and court investigation.The second part is the operation of a witness to testify in court proceedings.“The Court Investigation Procedures” perfected the conditions for witnesses to appear in court,standardized the order in which witnesses appeared in court,and clarified the use of pretrial testimony.Through investigating the practice of Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court,Chongqing Municipal First Intermediate People's Court,Chengdu Intermediate People's Court and Taizhou Intermediate People's Court,it has been found that in the non-pilot court,Chongqing Municipal First Intermediate People's Court actively promoted witnesses to attend the court and implemented relevant regulations,and formulated the implementation rules for witnesses appearing in court;The Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court was non-ideal in the implementation of witnesses' testimony in court,and the number of witnesses appeared in court was very small;At the same time,the Taizhou Intermediate People's Court and the Huzhou Intermediate People's Court,as pilot courts,had formulated detailed regulations forwitnesses appearing in court,but the total number of witnesses appeared in court was small;The Chengdu Intermediate People's Court had formulated systematic operating standards for witnesses to testify in court,actively promoted the substantive trial,and implemented the content of “The Court Investigation Procedures”.The third part is the operation of the evidence review and recognition process.“The Court Investigation Procedures” stipulated that the key evidence and disputed evidence should be presented and questioned separately in general.Based on the best evidence rules,it clarified the presentation requirements of all kinds of evidence,established the confrontation rules between witnesses,and stipulated the adoption rules of pretrial testimony and in-court testimony.As for the way of proof,after the implementation of “The Court Investigation Procedures”,the prosecutor's declaration of reading written materials was still widespread.There were not many evidences such as physical evidence and documentary evidence actually presented in the trial.In the surveyed area,only the Chengdu Intermediate People's Court had detailed regulations on the specifications of the evidence.Regarding the confrontation rules,Chongqing Municipal First Intermediate People's Court and the Taizhou Intermediate People's Court allowed confrontation between controversial witnesses,while the Chengdu Intermediate People's Court prohibited confrontation between witnesses.Regarding the adoption of pretrial testimony and testimony in court,the judge used to refer to the contents of the pretrial written testimony in the judgment documents to determine the facts of the case,and the witness' s statements in court still had limited effect on the judge's determination of the facts of the case.The fourth part is the summary analysis and the consummation suggestion of the practice of “The Court Investigation Procedures”.According to the research results,the effect of implementing “The Court Investigation Procedures ” varies from place to place,the number of witnesses testifying in court had been improved,the content of the court investigation had been enriched,and the substantive level of the trial had been enhanced to a certain extent,which is worthy of recognition.At the same time,there are also some problems,such as the ineffectiveness of the pretrial meeting and the court investigation procedure,the unsatisfactory effect of the key witness testifying in court,the rigidity of the prosecutor's way of giving evidence,and the limited effect of the witness' s statement in court on the judge's determination of the facts of the case.The trial has not really materialized,and the relationship between trial and pretrial has not changed significantly.There is still a long way to go beforethe establishment of a “trial-centered” criminal litigation system.In this regard,it should further clarify the effectiveness of the pretrial conference,ensure the necessity of the testimony in court,abandon the way in which the evidence is presented in the order of legal evidence,and increase the importance of the judgment document on the appearance of the witness.