On The Distinction Between The Confirmation Of Facts And The Application Of Law In Criminal Jury

To explore the distinction between the fact finding and the law application in criminal people's jury system,it is necessary to discriminate between the concepts of “factual identification” and “legal application”,and discussion and analysis of what is the factual identification and legal application."Serving on a jury without trial" is a major problem that has been criticized for a long time in the operation of the people's jury system.Distinguishing the factual identification and legal application in criminal people's jury system is conducive to solving the problem of "Serving on a jury without trial" and truly exerting the role of the people's jurors.At the same time,it is also conducive to solving the problem of insufficient professional ability of the people's jurors in the process of participating in the trial,cultivating the enthusiasm of the people for participation in the trial,and also facilitating the people's jurors to play the role of supervision and checks and balances in the process of participating in the trial,which is more conducive to prevention the judges have exclusive powers to ensure that the juror's rights are not interfered.At present,the theoretical controversy over the distinction between fact finding and law application mainly focuses on whether there is a contradiction between the two.Although many scholars believe that the distinction between fact finding and law application is vague,the analysis from different angles can confirm the feasibility of distinguishing between fact finding and legal application.The specific manifestation is that there is an essential difference between facts and law.The fact is that the objective reality has already occurred.The law is a behavioral norm abstracted from life;moreover,the factual finding can properly block the law,and the prosecution's review and prosecution actually shields the elements that may involve the application of the law;and the actual differentiation method adopted outside the domain plays a certain role in the operation process,therefore,the extraterritorial experience proves that the fact finding and the law application are distinguishable.Although the actual application method can make a distinction,it still reveals many problems,which are manifested in the case fact finding list not accurately distinguishing between fact finding and law application;the facts in the fact list are too general;the judge's guidance is arbitrary;there is a lack of consensus on the applicable procedures for the actualdifferentiation and the standardization of the two.The reason why these problems are exposed is because the law stipulates too much principle and does not introduce relevant specific laws and regulations.At the same time,the mechanism for implementing the differentiation is relatively short,so that no supporting measures are implemented in conjunction with the implementation of the system.In addition,a large amount of operating costs have been added during the implementation of the actual differentiation method,and the theoretical research on the problem in the theoretical community is still superficial.Under the joint action of these reasons,the perfection of the people's jury system should start with the practical problems of distinguishing between fact finding and law application.Appropriately modify the case fact finding list template and content,and regulate the applicable procedures and reduce operating costs,it is hoped that the above measures will help the development of China's criminal jury system.