Study On The Examination Right Of The Accused

It is undoubtedly very important for the accused to review the case and obtain information from the case file for their own defense.In recent years,a series of rulings by the European Court of Human Rights have prompted signatory countries to consider granting the accused the right to review the case.At present,this approach has not been widely recognized and there are still some controversies.China has not yet established a system for the right of the accused to review papers,and there is also some controversy in the theoretical community over whether to grant the accused the right to review papers.However,in China’s criminal litigation practice,the accused person has the right to review papers.The implementation of the leniency system for confession and punishment requires the accused to sign a statement of confession and punishment during the review and prosecution stage.The accused person’s confession of guilt and punishment also require them to have the right to review the documents.Without the right to review papers,the accused has no knowledge of the evidence that the prosecution accuses them of when pleading guilty and punishing them.It is difficult to say that their confession and punishment have voluntariness and authenticity.Therefore,in-depth exploration and research on the issue of the accused’s right to review papers has certain significance for protecting the basic rights and interests of the accused and promoting the development of criminal proceedings in China.Therefore,this article will focus on exploring the issue of granting the accused the right to review papers.The first part is an analysis of the reasons for granting the accused the right to review papers.This section mainly elaborates on the legitimacy of the accused’s right to review papers,the limitations of defense lawyers’ right to review papers,and the necessity of granting the accused the right to review papers in cases of confession and punishment.The legitimacy of the defendant’s review lies in the fact that the defendant has the status of a litigant and the right to defense.It is undeniable that they can independently exercise their review rights.Currently,there are many criminal cases in China where there is no defense.For defendants without defense,if they are unable to review the case,they cannot defend themselves.The defendant’s right to evidence also requires them to have the review rights.There are also certain limitations to the right of defense lawyers to review papers in China.Firstly,although the defender has a good understanding of legal knowledge,they are unable to handle other highly professional evidence materials;Secondly,the defender is not a witness to the case and is likely to be misled by the facts constructed in the case file;Thirdly,some evidence materials in the case files can only be personally identified and confirmed by the accused.With the widespread application of confession and punishment,it is also necessary to grant the accused the right to review papers in confession and punishment cases,ensuring the voluntary nature of confession and effectively complementing the duty lawyer system.At the same time,it can ensure the substantive authenticity of confession and punishment cases.The second part is the clue of the defendant’s right to review the case.To sort out the controversy regarding the provision of defense lawyers verifying evidence with defendants in China’s legislation,and to propose that"verifying evidence" actually implies the defendant’s right to review papers,which is a reflection of the defendant’s right to review papers.At the same time,there are also case breakthroughs in China’s criminal prosecution practice regarding the right of the accused to review the case,using the cases of Bo Xilai and Liu Zhijun as examples for analysis.The third part is an analysis of the pros and cons of the defendant’s right to review the case.Granting the accused the right to review the case is conducive to achieving equality between prosecution and defense,reflecting the subject status of the accused in the proceedings,and improving litigation efficiency.Of course,granting the accused the right to review papers also has certain drawbacks,including the possibility of retracting the confession,affecting the authenticity of the confession,risking retaliation against the victim,and possibly leaking the privacy and state secrets of third parties.The fourth part explores the institutional design of the accused’s right to review documents in China based on the practical experience of the European Court of Human Rights.The European Court of Human Rights,through three precedents:Kamasinskiv Austria,Foucher v.France,and Ocalan v.Turkey,holds that:firstly,the defendant should have the right to review and be the subject of the right to review.Secondly,the defendant’s right to review papers can be restricted,but the restriction must be in extremely necessary circumstances.Thirdly,in order to fully protect the exercise of their right to defense,the time for the accused to review the case should be as early as possible.European human rights adopt the model of case law,and its relevant precedents on the right of the accused to review the case and its inherent spirit have been widely recognized,which has also led to universal adherence by signatory countries to the European Convention on Human Rights.This also has high reference value for research in China.Therefore,based on the spirit of the precedents of the European Court of Human Rights and combined with the actual situation in China,the system of the accused’s right to review documents should be better established.In the future,the establishment of a system for the right of the accused to review papers in China should be designed from the aspects of the subject of review,the scope of review,the location,time and method of review exercise,and remedies for infringement of review rights.