Study On The Connection Between Supervisory Evidence And Criminal Procedure Evidence

As a power type independent of administrative power and judicial power,supervisory power is bound to produce a series of new problems in the process of connecting with criminal procedure.The evidence collected by supervisory organs according to the supervisory procedure is supervisory evidence,and the differences between the two types of evidence in terms of types and norms of evidence collection cause difficulties in connecting.The evidence system is the soul of the litigation system,but also one of the important links of the legal system construction,the realization of the effective connection between the supervision evidence and the criminal evidence,to further promote the construction of the party conduct and anti-corruption struggle,to achieve the rule of law is of great significance.Starting from the difficulty of connecting supervisory evidence and criminal procedure evidence in practice,this paper analyzes the causes of the connection problem,and discusses the scheme of connecting the two laws and the auxiliary guarantee mechanism from the aspect of mechanism construction.The first chapter takes J Province as an example to enumerate practical problems in the connection of two kinds of evidence.This is mainly reflected in the Supervision Law’s relatively broad and principled provisions on evidence,which has a large space for interpretation,resulting in the imperfection of the theoretical basis of evidence convergence with the Criminal Procedure Law.The types of supervision evidence include evidence of duty violation and evidence of duty crime,but the Supervision Law does not make a clear distinction between them,and the standards of evidence conversion and definition of verbal evidence in the process of supervision are not clear.In criminal proceedings,it is difficult to put forward opinions on the exclusion of illegal supervision evidence,the supervision evidence collected by "big data" is plagued by legitimacy,and there are problems in the disposal of illegal evidence after exclusion.The second chapter analyzes the causes of the difficulty of evidence cohesion.The rules on the exclusion of illegal surveillance evidence need to be deepened,and the scope of illegal surveillance evidence is unclear and it is difficult to obtain simultaneous audio and video recordings.The differences in the functions of supervisory and procuratorial organs increase the difficulty in connecting evidence and the contradiction between political and legal supervision properties.There are differences in the legislative emphases between the Supervision Law and the Criminal Procedure Law,which leads to the lack of smooth connection of evidence.In addition,the professional degree of the case personnel in the supervisory organs also affects the quality of the evidence under supervision.If the evidence quality is not high,it is more likely to have connection problems after it is transferred to the procuratorial organs.The third chapter focuses on how to construct the mechanism of the connection between the two kinds of evidence.First of all,it is necessary to build a macro framework of procedure cohesion,and make legislative improvement from the types of evidence transferred,rules of evidence use,and early intervention of procuratorial organs.Second,it is necessary to establish graded evidence review standards,distinguish the boundary between duty violation and duty crime cases,and improve the use efficiency of evidence through different evidence review standards.Third,we should improve the examination procedure of supervisory evidence,establish a mechanism for separating investigation and examination within supervisory organs,strengthen external supervision and restriction,and give play to the role of procuratorial organs in getting involved in advance.Fourth,improve the rules for the exclusion of illegal evidence,clarify the scope of application of the exclusion of illegal supervision evidence,and improve the disposal procedures after the exclusion of illegal evidence.Fifth,we should improve the system of returning and conducting supplementary investigations by procuratorial organs to enhance their ability to prove evidence.The fourth chapter describes the auxiliary guarantee system for the connection of the two types of evidence,improving the quality of supervisory evidence from the aspects of establishing efficient case handling system and strengthening personnel discipline management,such as strictly observing the standards of filing cases,strengthening information construction,standardizing the behavior of supervision,investigation and evidence collection,checking the case trial,strengthening the selection,training and evaluation of disciplinary inspection and supervision cadres,etc.This paper introduces the working experience of realizing the smooth connection between the two methods in practice.