Research On Exclusion Rules Of Confessions Obtained By Luring And Deceiving Methods

In June 2017,the Provisions on Strict Exclusion of Illegal Evidence in Handling Criminal Cases(hereinafter referred to as “the Provisions on Strict Exclusion of Illegal Evidence”)which jointly formulated by the Supreme People's court,the Supreme People's Procuratorate,the Ministry of Public Security,the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Justice was officially released.It has great positive significance in highlighting the strict administration of justice,promoting judicial justice and strengthening human rights protection,but on some urgent and controversial issues,it doesn't seem to give a satisfactory answer,such as how to deal with the confession obtained by luring and deceiving in judicial practice? Should it be excluded? What are the exclusion criteria? How to establish the rule of exclusion?At present,there are some problems in excluding confessions obtained by luring and deceiving in the court proof link,such as synchronous recording and video recording are difficult to play a role,criminal suspects and defendants are difficult to bear the burden of preliminary proof,the court has a certain degree of identity tendency and the lack of corresponding standards for the “exclusion” request leads to the lack of judges' discretion basis.Based on the practical needs of regulating the above practice disorder,maintaining judicial authority,strengthening judicial justice and promoting human rights protection,it is necessary to establish the exclusion rules of confessions obtained by luring and deceiving methods.However,due to the antagonistic nature of criminal interrogation,the interrogation must rely on certain interrogation strategies,which naturally contain the elements of seduction and deception,so it is difficult to distinguish the luring and deceiving methods from interrogation strategies,this is also the main obstacle in the process of establishing the exclusion standards and rules of confessions obtained by luring and deceiving methods.Therefore,in the establishment of the rule,we should take the elimination of the above obstacles as the premise,and learn from the beneficial experience of foreign countries,taking the voluntary confession standard as the primary investigation standard,to investigate whether the luring and deceiving methods used may cause the criminal suspect and the defendant to make false confession against their true will,and take the necessity standard as the auxiliary standard to investigate to distinguish the luring and deceiving methods and interrogation strategies.At the same time,the principles of necessity,legality,rationality,confession arbitrariness and authenticity should be taken as the principles to determine the legality of the luring and deceiving methods.The judge may consider comprehensively from the subjective purpose of the interrogator,the degree of illegality of the interrogator,the causal relationship between seduction,deception and confession,the value of the confession obtained,the nature and complexity of the case,etc.,then discretionary exclusion of statements obtained by luring and deceiving methods.At the same time,we can also improve the system of synchronous recording and video recording,weaken the preliminary burden of proof of criminal suspects and defendants,introduced guidance cases by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate to promote the implementation of the exclusion rules of confessions obtained by luring and deceiving methods.The establishment of the exclusion rules of confessions obtained by luring and deceiving methods will greatly make up for the loopholes and deficiencies of the legal provisions,and will play an important and positive role in maintaining the judicial authority,strengthening the judicial justice,human rights protection and even the construction of a country ruled by law.