英语论文网

erms of Act stipulates itself, or to reflect on the whole , no doubt there are still many defects . Mainly reflected in the following aspects:

Legislative provisions of the Criminal Procedural referee terms is very limited , it is clearly impossible to regulate all procedural illegal situation. Stipulated in Article 191 of the first instance court of second instance court found violation of legal proceedings should cassation , remand the case for example of several . In fact, all cases which are not listed may occur in the first instance stage . And may occur in the second trial , and the trial supervision procedure stages: some illegalities that breach avoidance system , unlawful deprivation or restriction of rights of parties to litigation , may not only occur at the trial stage , and may occur in the investigation, prosecution and even filing stage . In accordance with the existing provisions , the referee is only applicable procedural appear first instance the case of the offense . Obviously the referee was too narrow , so a lot of procedural violations lost in the legal regulation . Meanwhile, China's criminal legislation relating to procedural provisions of unlawful consequences . Only the first 191 of the Criminal Procedure Code " remand " and the Supreme People's Court "interpretation" of Article 61 of the " exclusionary rule " in two ways , but the provisions are too simple generalization. This is clearly unable to meet practical needs .

In our country, the right to judicial control of the entire criminal proceedings do not form , the court of criminal procedure as the sole jurisdiction of the subject 's status has not been established. Occurred in pre-trial proceedings in the criminal procedural issues are not independent of both defense and prosecution through court decisions , and often through the stages of the proceedings as a party accused the state prosecution authorities exist to resolve. Which is particularly prominent criminal trial proceedings against suspects forcibly taken decisions on punishment and its implementation are the main recourse implementation . Thus, as the accuser of the police and prosecutors in the pre-trial stage became "their case the judge" is bound to make people question their impartiality . This is caused by extended detention , abuse of coercive measures, such as the reason for happening .

Code of Criminal Procedure and the Supreme Court 's "interpretation" Although the referee made some procedural requirement , but because only provides certain procedural consequences of the referee , the referee and procedural mechanisms for the specific operation is no provision in the rules of procedure , leading to judicial practice these two provisions can not be real implementation . To the exclusionary rule , for example, the Supreme Court 's "interpretation" clearly defines the use of torture or threat , enticement, deceit and other illegal methods to collect the testimonial evidence can not be used under the facts of the case . However, the judicial interpretation of the application of the exclusionary rule does not make any procedural issues clearly defined . Results , " in judicial practice , the defense made even exclude the application of the relevant prosecution evidence , it usually does not induce judges specialized procedural referee program ." Lack of appropriate procedural rul本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。