Research On The System Of Criminal Coercive Measures In China

The 2018 Criminal Procedure Law places criminal coercive measures in Chapter 6 of the General Provisions(35 articles),connoting the configuration of state power and citizens’ procedural rights in the process of applying criminal coercive measures.The contrast between the two in a specific criminal case is significant and should be developed in the framework of the rule of law and in the pursuit of the best balance between the values of safeguarding citizens’ procedural rights.From the aforementioned framework,this study intends to analyse and reflect on our criminal coercive measures and their interrelationship(i.e.the system of criminal coercive measures)in order to advance the knowledge and understanding of our criminal coercive measures system,to which the following can be stated.First,a preliminary definition of the basic concept and basic functions of the criminal coercive measures system.On this basis,it analyses the coercive measures provided for in Chapter 6 of the current Criminal Procedure Law,which are,according to the degree of severity of deprivation or restriction of personal freedom,in the order of detention,bail,residential surveillance,detention and arrest,forming a preliminary system of criminal coercive measures with internal logic,which has the initial ability to restrain judicial power and litigation rights guaranteeing in terms of form and rules.Secondly,on the basis of the foregoing,the development of China’s criminal coercive measures system is examined from the perspective of litigation rights guaranteeing.From the progress of the four codes guaranteeing the procedural rights of criminal suspects and defendants from the 1979 Criminal Procedure Law to the 2018 Criminal Procedure Law,the 1996 Criminal Procedure Law has made greater progress,the 2012 Criminal Procedure Law has advanced in an orderly manner,and the 2018 Criminal Procedure Law has steadily improved,but there are still certain gaps in its examination of the protection of human rights and procedural rights in the framework of the rule of law.Again,on the basis of demonstrating the positive utility of coercive measures(the system)and their guarantee of human rights and procedural rights,the possible problems of the existing coercive measures system in terms of safeguarding human rights and procedural rights are examined.First,coercive measures(such as detention or custody)are inherently flawed in themselves.Moreover,as five types of coercive measures,there are still shortcomings in the overall analysis,or they still need to be streamlined to form a relatively circumscribed system,which leads to misconceptions of coercive measures among legislators and society at large,resulting in the priority of the concept of punishing crimes and the fictionalization of the concept of litigation rights guaranteeing and human rights,and a confused criminal coercive measures(system)is more likely to lead to abuse of power.Secondly,the operational mechanism of criminal coercive measures lacks procedural and judicial construction,which deflates the procedural right to enter the law.Thirdly,lack of procedural proof mechanism in the application of criminal coercive measures.Finally,in response to the aforementioned shortcomings,suggestions are made to address the problem in two main ways.Firstly,the issue of deficiencies in the system of criminal coercive measures should be regulated in order to improve the level of litigation rights guaranteeing.Secondly,on the basis of the formation of a reasonable system of criminal coercive measures,there is a need to judicially construct criminal coercive measures to promote and enhance the positive effects of China’s criminal coercive measures system in guaranteeing human rights and litigation rights.Thirdly,perfecting the procedural proof mechanism of the application of criminal coercive measures.Fourthly,improve the right relief system related to criminal coercive measures.In conclusion,when examining the system of criminal coercive measures in China in the light of the modern concept of the rule of law and the basic consensus of guaranteeing the litigation rights of criminal suspects and defendants,the following judgement can be made.On the one hand,China’s Criminal Procedure Law Code has made certain achievements in regulating the system of criminal coercive measures,safeguarding the basic rights of criminal suspects in keeping with the times and forming a relatively stable system of criminal coercive measures.On the other hand,this system is still far from the requirements of a mature rule of law.Therefore,our legislature should continue its efforts in the area of criminal procedure law to further manifest the independent values of criminal procedure law and the spirit of the constitutional guarantee of the fundamental rights of citizens.