| The jurisprudential concept of the pretrial conference was imported from Western countries,especially the American system.In the Criminal Procedure Law amended in 2012,the provision of Article 182,paragraph 2 was added: "Before the court session,the judges may convene the public prosecutor,the litigant,the attorney,and the agents ad litem to know the information and listen to the opinions on trial-related issues such as avoidance,the list of witnesses in court and the exclusion of illegal evidence." Obviously,the purpose of grafting this system into the existing criminal procedure in China is to solve the excessively weak condition.By this way,we can reach an agreement or raise an objection on issues such as jurisdiction,avoidance,evidence discovery and submission of new evidence,exclusion of illegal evidence,and application for trial in camera,so as to reduce the time spent in investigation before the formal court.This will enable the court to focus on the debate on the entity of the case itself,and promote the criminal procedure to be more detailed and perfect,rather than one-step from prosecution to court trial,which is of great significance to the judicial efficiency and procedural justice in China.However,the rough design and vague orientation of the new system caused a lot of obstacles and frequent chaos during its operation process.Subsequently,the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate also issued corresponding judicial interpretations to further stipulate the content,such as determining the situation of the pretrial conference.Unfortunately,from a macro perspective,these laws and regulations still have no detailed specifications for many specificcontents,which makes it impossible for the judicial authorities to begin the implementation.It was not until the comprehensive practice of Procedures for the Pre-Trial Conference of Criminal Cases of People’s Courts(Trial)in 2018 that the system was formally developed again.Nevertheless,there is still an insurmountable institutional gap when handling issues on jurisdiction,avoidance and exclusion of illegal evidence.It is certain that the establishment of the pretrial conference system is to provide a platform for the problems to be solved in the current criminal procedure.Therefore,neither academic nor practical circle in China has given up the continuous exploration of this system,and very hopeful about its development prospect.Against this background,the re-orientation of the pretrial conference and the reconstruction of its functional structure is deeply consistent with present requirements for comprehensively deepening judicial reform.This paper aims to reconstruct the overall function of the pretrial conference.It attempts to reconstruct the internal structure of the pretrial conference system,expand its external structure,and fully release the procedural functions through a two-pronged reform approach.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,the paper is divided into four chapters.Chapter 1 introduces the related theories and characteristics of the pretrial conference system.Taking the concept,characteristics and basic legal provisions as the starting point,beginning from the initial purpose and requirements of the functional design of the pretrial conference in China,it analyzes the design philosophy and overall expectations of future development direction.By dealing with procedural issues and substantive issues separately,the pretrial conference procedure shows the functional characteristics and institutional advantages of itself,which provides relevant theoretical basis for the subsequent research and development of this system.Chapter 2 focuses on the current situation study of the pretrial conference system,with investigating the actual operation in China,as well as particular problems arising in practice.Through summing up and analyzing the relevant data,consulting the website data from domestic judicial organs,and studying the research results of some scholars,we clarify the multiplereasons for restricting the development of the system,which leads to a reflection and experience summary on the status quo.Chapter 3 compares the provisions between foreign and domestic pretrial conference.It is clear that China has no detailed regulations in the aspects of initiating proceedings,participants,content scope,and legal validity of the conference,so the function of pretrial conference system in modern advanced judicial countries can not be achieved here.Through the study and comparison of countries with advanced system experience from different legal systems,we can summarize the advantages and disadvantages from their respective system,and refine valuable experience in line with China’s national conditions,which can provide guidance for our specific reform programs.Chapter 4 reconstructs the pretrial conference system from an all-round perspective by integrating the advanced theoretical systems at home and abroad,which is mainly devoted to reconstructing the internal functions and establishing the independent status of the pretrial conference system;expanding its external functions,and extending the effectiveness space of the conference as well as improving its cohesion function to other specialized litigation systems.Ultimately,combining with the latest development direction of judicial reform,the paper attempts to create a newly oriented pretrial conference system. |
PDF Full Text Request