How to improve the evidence discovery system in criminal proceedings

Where the public prosecutor, parties, defenders, or litigants have objections to the testimony of a witness in the code segment, and the witness's testimony has a major impact on the verdict or sentencing of the case, and the people's court finds that it is necessary for the witness to appear in court to testify, the witness shall appear in court to testify.

Code of Criminal Procedure

Article 192: Where the public prosecutor, parties, defenders, or litigants have objections to a witness's testimony, and the witness's testimony has a major impact on the verdict or sentencing of the case, and the people's court finds that it is necessary for the witness to appear in court to testify, the witness shall appear in court to testify.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph apply to people's police appearing in court as witnesses to testify about crimes they witnessed in the performance of their duties.

Where the public prosecutor, parties, defenders, or litigants have objections to the evaluation opinion, and the people's court finds that it is necessary for the evaluator to appear in court, the evaluator shall appear in court to testify. Where, upon notice from the people's court, the evaluator refuses to appear in court to testify, the evaluation opinion must not be the basis of the verdict.

1) Rules for the comprehensive collection of evidence.

That is to say, when judicial personnel collect evidence, they should collect as comprehensively as possible all factual materials that can prove the true circumstances of the case, and the form of evidence should not only exhaust the seven forms of evidence provided for in the Criminal Procedure Law, but also comprehensively collect as much as possible the evidence materials on the defendant's guilt, innocence, minor crime, and serious crime.

2) Rules for lawful evidence collection, that is, requiring that the subject of evidence collection is lawful, the procedures are lawful, and the methods are appropriate.

The subject lawfully requests that the person collecting the evidence must have a lawful identity. If witness testimony is collected, it must be obtained by two or more judicial personnel; The defense lawyer collects materials related to the case from the victim, his close relatives, and the witnesses provided by the victim.

3) Principles for adjudication organs to collect evidence.

The rights and obligations of adjudication organs in collecting and collecting evidence, and some specific operational procedures. As mentioned above, China's current litigation model has strong characteristics of authority, and China's current trial method is not a typical adversarial system, but still has a large degree of judges' use of authority.

4) Best Evidence Rule.

1. The rule of best evidence applies to documentary evidence, which means that the original written material is better than the reproduction, and is therefore the "best evidence". With the continuous development of modern technologies such as reproduction technology and computer technology, this principle has also undergone some adaptations, and in some exceptional cases provided by law, the effect of reproductions is equivalent to that of originals.

2. The documentary evidence collected or collected shall be the original. Copies or photocopies may only be made if there is genuine difficulty in obtaining the originals. The physical evidence collected or collected shall be the original.

Only when the original item is inconvenient to transport, difficult to preserve, or should be returned to the victim in accordance with law, may a ** or video video sufficient to reflect the appearance or content of the original item be taken.

5) The principle of exclusion of evidence of illegal speech.

Verbal evidence refers to evidence of existence and manifestation expressed in human language. Among the types of evidence prescribed by law, witness testimony, victim statements, defendant confessions, and appraisal conclusions are all verbal evidence.

1. How long does it take for the procuratorate to receive notice from the court to transfer the supplementary transfer materials.

1. Where the people's court submits a written opinion to the people's procuratorate requesting that the materials be transferred for supplementation, and the people's procuratorate finds it necessary to transfer them, it shall supplement them within 3 days of receiving the notice.

2. Legal basis: Article 361 of the Criminal Procedure Rules of the People's Procuratorate.

Before the amendment of the Criminal Procedure Law, China established the prosecution method of the "file transfer doctrine", which one-sidedly emphasized substantive justice, was a mere formality, and ignored procedural fairness, and it was difficult to reflect the defense of the prosecution and defense, and there was no "evidence discovery" at all. After the amendment, the Criminal Procedure Law has established a new trial model, which has provided a premise for the emergence of the evidence discovery system, and has made provisions on the content of evidence discovery, which are mainly reflected in:

First, the prosecution stage. Paragraph 1 of Article 36 stipulates that the defender may consult, search, and reproduce the litigation documents and technical appraisal materials of the case from the date on which the people's procuratorate reviews the case for prosecution.

Second, the trial stage. Paragraph 2 of Article 36 stipulates that the defender may consult, copy, and reproduce materials on the facts of the crime alleged in the case from the date on which the people's court accepts the case.

1) It is conducive to ensuring the objective veracity of the case and bringing about substantive equality between the subjects of the litigation.

An important purpose and value pursuit of the establishment of various procedural systems in criminal procedure is to make the case objective and truthful, so that the subjective judgment can conform to the objective reality to the greatest extent. The legal system of criminal evidence discovery can ensure that the prosecution and defense exchange evidence information related to the case with each other before the trial, ensure that the prosecution and defense are fully prepared for the trial, and weaken the adverse impact of the adversarial trial method, "The cross-examination and certification of criminal evidence through court trials not only guarantees the objective authenticity of the case, but also ensures the substantive equality of the legal status of the prosecution and defense."

2) It is conducive to protecting the defendant's procedural rights.

There is no doubt that the right to know the facts of the alleged crime before the people's court is tried by the people's court is a concrete realization of the constitutional principle that "the defendant in criminal proceedings has the right to a defense"; The criminal discovery system is set up so that the defendant can understand the evidence supporting the prosecution's prosecution through his defense lawyer, and enables the defender to refute the facts of the crime alleged by the prosecution as the national prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the prosecution) at the court trial. At the same time, through the discovery system, the defense can also understand the evidence materials in the prosecution's possession in favor of the defendant, which will undoubtedly become a strong reason to support the defense's confrontation, so as to ensure the realization of the defendant's core procedural right - the right to defense, and the evidence discovery system has played an important role in this regard.

3) It is conducive to determining the focus of the case controversy and ensuring the quality of the case's trial.

Because the prosecution and defense exchanged case information with each other before the trial and made full preparations, it is easy to promote the formation of the focus of the dispute between the prosecution and defense, the cross-examination of evidence in the courtroom can be targeted, and the case information contained in the evidence can also be fully exchanged during the trial. There is no doubt that this is conducive to the formation of the trial judge's free testimony and to the court's formation of a correct judgment on the facts of the case and the correct judgment. Only in this way can the adversarial trial method in the substantive sense be established and the criminal procedure based on the principle of parties can be carried out smoothly.

4) It is conducive to ensuring the efficiency of litigation in court trials and saving judicial resources.

The legal system of criminal evidence discovery can not only prevent the trial from being interrupted due to the need to determine the focus of the dispute in the case and investigate and verify the evidence, so as to ensure the continuity of the court trial, but also make the verdict of the case conform to the objective reality to the greatest extent, let the defendant accept the sentence, and reduce unnecessary appeals and appeals. In this way, it will undoubtedly greatly improve the efficiency of litigation, save judicial resources, and ensure the realization of the principle of uninterrupted trial by the court.