On The Litigation Use Of Supervisory Evidence

As the key link between supervision mechanism and criminal trial mechanism,as well as between supervision law and criminal procedure law,supervision evidence plays an important role in the reform of supervision system.Supervisory evidence is the result of the investigation work of supervisory organ,and it is also the "quasi criminal evidence" that will enter the criminal procedure.To some extent,if the supervision evidence is standardized,the supervision and investigation work will be standardized,and the connection between the supervision and investigation work and the criminal procedure work will also be standardized.This paper attempts to explore the difficulties of supervision evidence in the process of criminal proceedings by means of literature research and comparative research,and points out the feasible path of standardization of supervision evidence.The first chapter of this paper discusses the theoretical definition of supervisory evidence and its litigation particularity.The supervisory evidence discussed in this paper includes evidence of discipline offences,duty violation and duty crime.Compared with other evidence,supervisory evidence has the characteristics of special collection subject,secret and closed collection process,administrative application,unidirectional collection and judgment,and selective transfer.The second chapter discusses the link between supervisory evidence and evidence in criminal proceedings.In this paper,it is argued that article 33,paragraph 1,of the Supervision Law,merely confers on supervisory evidence access to criminal proceedings without the need to transform it.When the supervisory evidence enters the criminal procedure,it needs to be examined,and the examination standard should include the requirements of the Supervision Law on investigation and evidence collection in addition to the standard on the examination of evidence in criminal proceedings.This paper holds that the verbal evidence before the initial examination of a case can only be used in criminal proceedings after being transformed.The future reform of the supervisory system requires the distinction between the filing of duty violations and the filing of duty crimes and the procedure of investigation of the two.The verbal evidence obtained in the investigation of duty violations must be transformed before it can be applied in criminal proceedings.At the same time,this paper considers that the Supervision Law,as a new law,has expanded the types of criminal evidence and the confession and defense of the investigated person has become a new type of evidence.Chapter 3,by comparing the relevant provisions of the Supervision Law with the Law on Criminal Procedure,discusses the determination of illegal evidence firstly,and this paper holds that although article 33,paragraph 3,of the Supervision Law does not explicitly stipulate that evidence obtained by "extorting confessions by torture" should be excluded,but this means naturally should be included in the"unlawful means" of the paragraph.The term "insult,abuse,ill-treatment,corporal punishment or disguised corporal punishment" under article 40,paragraph 2,of the Supervision Law should be considered as a means of extracting confessions by torture as set out in the Supervision Law.The legal provisions on which illegal evidence is excluded are not limited to Chapter V of the general provisions of the criminal procedure law and Chapter IV of the interpretation on the application of the criminal procedure law of the people's Republic of China promulgated by the Supreme People's court in 2012 as stipulated in the interpretation of the supervision law.All laws,regulations and relevant judicial interpretations that judicial organs should follow in the process of examining and judging evidence should be"the requirements and standards of evidence in criminal trials" In thi's chapter,the paper also discusses the exclusion of repeatable statements,the author believes that adhering to the "exception of principles" established in article 5 of the new rules of exclusion of illegal evidence is a feasible compromise.Chapter ? discusses the question of supplementary investigation after the case is transferred to prosecution.This chapter discusses the application of the system of returning for supplemental investigation and self supplementary investigation,as well as the connection of compulsory measures and the lawyer' s intervention during return supplementary investigation.The last chapter,compared with the first three chapters of the article,puts forward some suggestions on the standardization of supervision evidence.