Research On The Obligation Of True Statement Of Litigants In Civil Procedure In China

By the civil procedure law of our country and relevant judicial explanation obligation system preliminary established the true statement,the establishment of the system is beneficial to crackdown on false statement by the parties,to guide the parties to properly exercise their litigation rights,help the judge correctly determine the case facts,make fair case verdict.At the same time,it is beneficial to improve the evidential significance statement of the parties and provide more evidence for judges to judge the facts of the case.However,the following problems still exist in the implementation of the system of obligation of truthful representation in China: Real state obligation system specific definition,false statement behavior of subjective psychological state ambiguity exists,the parties concluded that false statement behavior requirements are not clear,there is no evidence for the claim of the parties and distinguish statement,the provisions of the punishment of false statement behavior is relatively single,and real state obligations and other principles,system of cohesion is not close.The above problems have resulted in the situation of reduced litigation efficiency,damaged litigation order and difficult to maintain substantive justice in judicial practice,which not only violates the original legislative intention of the obligation of true representation,but also adversely affects the normal advancement of litigation procedures.The obligation of true statement is the requirement of good faith principle to litigant’s good faith in litigation.It is the amendment and supplement to the principle of argumentalism,which is consistent with the purpose of civil litigation in China and the requirement of litigant’s obligation to promote litigation.The theoretical basis for the reasonable existence of the truthstatement obligation system above provides a theoretical basis for the further improvement of the truth-statement obligation system in legislation and judicial practice.For this proposal,the parties shall be clear in the legislation in our country real state obligation system specific boundaries,in violation of the components of real state obligation and the substantive judge standard,clear the punishment to make a false statement behavior subjective psychological status of the parties,to distinguish between claims and evidence on the parties statements of different penalties,Increase the parties in violation of the real state obligation system on the responsibility of the tort law,criminal responsibility and so on,thus increasing the parties to the case facts stated on the authenticity of the illegal cost,and eliminate the parties for may result in criminal liability,reveal the truth of special interest such as related to the case facts,at the same time,In order to improve the system of the parties’ obligation to make true statements,the parties’ obligation to appear in court and the judge’s obligation to explain should be coordinated with the self-admission system and the burden of proof.With the aid of the legislative measures to promote and safeguard measures,justice,on the one hand,to give enough evidence to access rights and other related rights,the parties for party deliberately violate his subjective cognition of real state behavior play a deterrent,reduce judicial practice if the parties to make false statements,false identity and false denial behavior,realize the goal of legislation in the litigation integrity;On the other hand,it is conducive to the judge to correctly determine the facts of the case and make a fair ruling on the case,and it is more sufficient to determine the authenticity of the false statement made by the parties,in order to promote the fairness of the civil procedure and substantive justice in Our country.