Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)qqpublished in(发表于) 2013/11/23 17:22:50 People’s Republic of China Supreme Court： cleans up the major grievances misjudged analytical communications
Nandu "courts should strictly implement the legal standards of proof, strengthened evidence review mechanisms. Extorting confessions by torture or freezing, hungry, drying, roasting, fatigue hearing the confessions of the accused and other illegal methods to collect, should be excluded ", following the recently introduced Central politics and Law Committee of the first after preventing the wronged and misjudged cases guidance, the Supreme Court announced yesterday the establishment of a sound protection against criminal mechanism set forth above the clear requirements of the wronged and misjudged cases and further clarifying the mechanisms for evidence review criteria to prevent wronged and misjudged cases and cases.
18 the third plenary session of the decision made to sound misjudged the prevention mechanism. Yesterday's opinion of the Supreme Law enacted in accordance with criminal procedure law and relevant judicial interpretations, and a total of 27 from concepts of Justice, review of evidence, cases, auditing, supervision and other aspects specific provisions, is the people's Court against wronged and misjudged cases, comprehensive guidance documents.
The views put forward, the people's Court insisted exercise jurisdiction independently according to law the principles cannot be due to media hype and parties appealing to visiting and local "stability maintenance" pressure on referees violates the law.
The comments called convicted cases with insufficient evidence, should adhere to the principle suspect no punishment, declares the defendant not guilty, and shall not be reduced to "conservative" decision. Convictions the evidence is true and sufficient, but the impact of sentencing evidence in doubt, should be dealt with in determining sentence in favour of the defendant.
Views had also been strengthened evidence of review mechanisms, evidence has not been produced to the Court, identification, examination, investigation procedures of the Tribunal verified shall not be taken as a basis. Evidence of conviction of doubt, people's procuratorates shall be proposed in writing supplementary investigations. People's Procuratorate of written material is not submitted within two months shall be determined according to put on evidence to render a decision in accordance with law.
Deputy President of the highest court of law sentences three Lv Guanglun noted that established the principle of doubt from the existing criminal procedure law, but in practice there is still doubt, crimes suspected phenomena such as light, for the quality of handling cases planted hidden danger. To completely abandon the "presumption of guilt" "rather wrong not to leak" wrong view of law enforcement. Finds that the facts of the case, it must be evidence-based. , Finds the evidence should be examined in accordance with legal procedures. The defendant is found guilty, evidence is true and sufficient standards of proof should apply.
Further the clarity of illegally obtained evidence
Speed read: provisions of the views, extorting confessions by torture or freezing, hungry, drying, roasting, fatigue hearing the confessions of the accused and other illegal methods to collect should be excluded.
Major misjudged cases to air their grievances corrected this year, most of the cases are not effectively exclude illegally obtained evidence. In 2010, the "two three" jointly issued the "two provisions", provides for extorting confessions by torture and other illegal means to obtain the evidence should be excluded, but due to the lack of extorting confessions by torture and other illegal methods, examples, some ambiguity in judicial practice examined ways to get away with it.
Yesterday introduced of views under in "two a evidence provides" of based Shang, to evidence review made has more strictly of requirements, not only clear made change "statements for King" of concept and practices, also to yiqian not effective clear of illegal evidence for has clear, first clear provides used torture torture or frozen, and hungry, and Sun, and roast, and fatigue trial, illegal method collection of accused for referred to should ruled out.
Views on illegal evidence exclusion presumption provides an emergency must live outside the interrogation, in a specified site questioned statements made in handling cases, failing to full video recordings made under interrogation, as well as confessions obtained through illegal methods cannot be excluded, should be excluded.
Judges for the case the first responsible person
Speed read: opinion stipulates that members of the collegial panel jointly responsible for the facts of the case, hosting the first responsible of the quality of judges for the case.
The Supreme Court stressed that judicial independence, not only to exclude external interference, and also explicitly demands the removal of the internal disturbances in order to avoid problems with attribution judge the actual case of the judgement. Allow full true collegial role, provides views to the full Court of the collegiate programs, requiring members of the collegial panel review facts and evidence, including through trial or scoring, independently made the comments and rationale.
Because death penalty cases relating to life, once a mistake irreparable, the Supreme Court requested the death penalty cases hosted by experienced judges.
Highest Act also provides for the Committee to discuss procedures, rules followed by independent members to express their views and explain the reasons, hosts the last comment. CRIC is the Premier was the last comment of the President can keep others from his influence.
In addition, the judicial practice, some grass-roots courts for the purpose of circumventing the superior authority, used to specify the jurisdiction of the lower courts, so that by its own Court of final appeal after appeal. Some kinds of Court of Appeal upheld the verdict instructions before a higher court. Both practices are leading to appeal ineffective. Ne bis in idem really to play a role in views required not by lowering the level to avoid the higher people's Court of the jurisdiction of the case supervision shall not determine the issues of fact and evidence the superior people's Court.
Review of death penalty cases is actually the lower court's supervision of the Supreme Court. Provided for in the comments to review death penalty cases, shall interrogate the defendant. Requested by defence counsel, should listen to their views. Evidence in doubt, should be investigated to verify and, if necessary, to investigate into the incident.
More problems arise, and also related to performance evaluation indicator system in handling cases in the court system. To address this issue, the views raised the issue of the scientific performance evaluation indicator system in handling cases, shall not appeal rate revision rate, remand rates for individual assessment index evaluation of work quality and effectiveness.
Without substantiated evidence shall not be taken as a basis for
Speed read: set out criminal trial should be based on the views the trial as the Center.
Compared to earlier in the trial centered on investigation of criminal cases, the opinions express provides factual evidence investigation in court, conviction and sentencing debated in the courts, decisions resulting in court.
Provides that the technical investigation measures taken to collect evidence, inter alia, could endanger the personal safety of the officer, or other serious consequences that may, the people's Court according to the terms of reference of the outside investigation out of court, without court proceedings verified, shall not be taken as a basis.
In criminal proceedings, although it has been stressed that the witnesses should be brought before the written testimony asking to exclude the ambiguity, but witnesses in criminal cases in China is still very low. Some grass-roots Court said witnesses failed to appear, nor to force his appearance, or witnesses directly in court that notation is not clear, the Court there was no way. To address this problem, provided for in the comments, according to witnesses should testify without good reason refused to testify after refusing to testify or appear in court, pretrial depositions could not confirm the authenticity of the shall not be used as the basis for deciding cases.
Court responses to defence is notoriously difficult. The defendant or defence counsel Court crime or Sin made submissions or evidence submitted, some judgement in no way reflect this very negative to identify cases. In response, the Supreme Law, submitted by the defendant and his defenders excuse, submissions and evidence submitted, or explained in the judgment document adopted in court or not, and the reasons for it.
Court shall jointly with the police and the public prosecution service case
Speed read: provisions of the views, the Court shall not participate in joint public security organs and people's procuratorates handling.
Although China's Constitution provides that justice organizations for mutual coordination and restraint and judicial practice, the three departments, the lack of restrictions, in some cases even started the investigation of public security organs at the joint investigation, made the trial after the investigation was just a formality.
Its views clear on the powers and responsibilities of the judicial officers, calls for the establishment of a sound judicial officers the powers and responsibilities of handling responsibility system. The judge shall perform their duties without accountability. Judicial officers to handle cases under trial rules or the law for selfish ends, in accordance with the provisions relating to trial work discipline and legal accountability.
Opinion also calls attention to the defenders of supervision and regulation, and guaranteed defence rights defenders meet, grading, investigation and evidence collection. Counsel to apply for access to evidence that might prove innocence, crime, shall give its permission. Also called for the strengthening of community supervision, provides significant, difficult and complex cases, can invite deputies to the NPC and CPPCC representatives attending the guanshen, grass-roots masses.
The Supreme Court:
Cleans up the major grievances misjudged analytical communications
The South yesterday, press interview comments on the Supreme Court preventing wronged and misjudged cases introduced Supreme Court of law sentences three leaders. The charge, the Supreme laws also cleans up the major misjudged cases analytical reporting systems to air their grievances. Major grievances of misjudged cases identified for practice, require careful control of the views you want to find problems, an in-depth analysis of the root causes, make sure that the problem no longer occurs, there may be a problem is resolved in a timely manner.
"Practice shows that the errors of law enforcement and judicial attitudes are reasons leading to wronged and misjudged cases. Only the total corrected errors that are not consistent with the rule of concepts and practices, wronged and misjudged cases happening again the real threat could be eliminated ", the official said.
Latest actions
Supreme Court opening micro-, small letters
South Supreme Court open at the Sina microblog @ the Supreme People's Court yesterday, Tencent launched the official micro-letter (public: the Supreme People's Court), and posted on the microblogging content views. It is understood that the supreme judge light, is the first national success. South reporter found that as at 9 o'clock last evening, micro-published 7 tweets, fans rose to 90,000.
Relevant person in charge of the Supreme Court, micro is one of judicial public initiatives, the micro-publishing people's courts at all levels in a timely manner of significant important judicial interpretations and trial information, important news, and so on. Micro, micro-mesh opening will also work with the Chief Justice "President of mailbox" "on behalf of Member advice" "false list of the executed query" firm linkage.
Press review
Corrected to prevent wronged and misjudged cases initiatives
In 2010, the Supreme Law, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, Ministry of public security, Ministry of Justice, jointly issued the provisions on review evidence in handling death penalty cases a number of regulations and rules on the handling of some problems of excluding illegally obtained evidence in criminal cases rules, known as the "two provisions", on perfecting criminal evidence system, ensuring the quality of handling cases play an important role. In 2012, the main legal provisions in criminal law in the process of being absorbed.
August 2013, the Central politics and Law Committee, launched the first guidance to prevent wronged and misjudged cases, asked the judge, Prosecutor, police responsible for quality life case in the terms of reference and establish a sound accountability mechanism of the wronged and misjudged cases. 18 the third plenary session of the party by the CPC Central Committee's decision on deepen reform of a number of important issues, to sound a single prevention mechanism also offers a clear request.
November 2013, the Supreme Court announced the establishment of a sound defense criminal wronged and misjudged cases working mechanisms.
A 12-14 version of the article:
South reporter Wang Dianxue
Interns from yankun in Beijing
Integrated Xinhua
(Original title: freezing and hungry supply available to Sun bake fatigue trials excluded)
南都讯 “法院要严格执行法定证明标准，强化证据审查机制。采用刑讯逼供或冻、饿、晒、烤、疲劳审讯等非法方法收集的被告人供述，应当排除”，继不久前中央政法委出台首个防止冤假错案指导意见后，最高法昨日公布的《关于建立健全防范刑事冤假错案工作机制的意见》提出以上明确要求，进一步明确了防范冤假错案的证据审查标准和案件审理机制。
十八届三中全会《决定》提出要健全错案防止机制。昨日最高法出台的《意见》根据刑诉法和相关司法解释制定而成，共27条，从司法理念、证据审查、案件审理、审核监督等方面作出具体规定，是人民法院防范冤假错案的综合性指导性文件。
《意见》提出，人民法院坚持依法独立行使审判权原则，不能因舆论炒作、当事方上访闹访和地方“维稳”等压力，作出违反法律的裁判。
《意见》要求，定罪证据不足的案件，应当坚持疑罪从无原则，依法宣告被告人无罪，不得降格作出“留有余地”的判决。定罪证据确实、充分，但影响量刑的证据存疑的，应当在量刑时作出有利于被告人的处理。
《意见》还强化了证据审查机制，提出证据未经当庭出示、辨认、质证等法庭调查程序查证属实，不得作为定案根据。定罪证据存疑的，应当书面建议人民检察院补充调查。人民检察院在两个月内未提交书面材料的，应当根据在案证据依法作出裁判。
最高法刑三庭副庭长吕广伦指出，现行刑事诉讼法确立了疑罪从无原则，但实践中仍然存在着疑罪从有、疑罪从轻等现象，为办理案件质量埋下了隐患。要彻底摒弃“有罪推定”“宁错勿漏”的错误执法观。认定案件事实，必须以证据为根据。应当依照法定程序审查、认定证据。认定被告人有罪，应当适用证据确实、充分的证明标准。
非法证据规定进一步明确
快读：《意见》规定，采用刑讯逼供或冻、饿、晒、烤、疲劳审讯等非法方法收集的被告人供述应当排除。
就今年纠正的多起重大冤错案来看，多数案件都因未有效排除非法证据。2010年，“两高三部”联合出台“两个证据规定”，规定对刑讯逼供等非法手段取得的证据应予排除，但因没有对刑讯逼供等非法手段作出列举规定，司法实践中一些模糊讯问方式得以蒙混过关。
昨日出台的《意见》在“两个证据规定”的基础上，对证据审查提出了更加严格的要求，不但明确提出改变“口供为王”的观念和做法，还对以前未有效明确的非法证据进行了明确，首次明确规定采用刑讯逼供或者冻、饿、晒、烤、疲劳审讯等非法方法收集的被告人供述应当排除。
《意见》还对非法证据排除进行了推定，规定除情况紧急必须现场讯问以外，在规定的办案场所外讯问取得的供述，未依法对讯问进行全程录音录像取得的供述，以及不能排除以非法方法取得的供述，应当排除。
法官为案件第一责任人
快读：《意见》规定，合议庭成员共同对案件事实负责，承办法官为案件质量第一责任人。
最高法强调审判独立，不但要求排除外部干扰，还明确要求排除内部干扰，以避免判决书署名法官实际未判案的问题。为使合议庭真正发挥合议的作用，《意见》对合议庭的合议程序进行规定，要求合议庭成员通过庭审或者阅卷等方式审查事实和证据，独立发表评议意见并说明理由。
因为死刑案件关乎人命，一旦有错无法挽回，最高法要求死刑案件由经验丰富的法官承办。
最高法还规定了审委会的讨论程序，规定委员依次独立发表意见并说明理由，主持人最后发表意见。因审委会一般是院长主持，院长最后发表意见可避免其他人受他的影响。
此外，司法实践中，一些基层法院为规避上级监督，常常指定下级法院管辖，这样上诉后仍由自己终审。还有一些法院为使上诉后能维持原判，就在判决前请示上级法院。两种做法都导致案件上诉形同虚设。为使二审真正起到作用，《意见》要求不得通过降低案件管辖级别规避上级人民法院的监督，不得就事实和证据问题请示上级人民法院。
复核死刑案件实际上是最高法院对下级法院的监督。《意见》规定，复核死刑案件，应当讯问被告人。辩护律师提出要求的，应当听取意见。证据存疑的，应当调查核实，必要时到案发地调查。
而以上问题的出现，也与法院系统内的办案绩效考核指标体系有关。为解决这一问题，《意见》提出建立科学的办案绩效考核指标体系，不得以上诉率、改判率、发回重审率等单项考核指标评价办案质量和效果。
未经法庭查实证据不得作为定案依据
快读：《意见》确立刑事案件审判应以庭审为中心。
相比于之前的以侦查为中心的刑事案件审判，《意见》明确规定事实证据调查在法庭，定罪量刑辩论在法庭，裁判结果形成于法庭。
《意见》规定，采取技术侦查措施收集的证据，除可能危及有关人员的人身安全，或可能产生其他严重后果，由人民法院依职权庭外调查核实的外，未经法庭调查程序查证属实，不得作为定案根据。
在刑事诉讼中，虽然一直强调证人应出庭接受询问以排除书面证言的模糊性，但中国的刑事案件证人出庭率仍非常低。一些基层法院表示，证人不出庭，也不能强制让他出庭，或有的证人在法庭上直接说记不清楚，法院也没有办法。为解决这一问题，《意见》规定，依法应当出庭作证的证人没有正当理由拒绝出庭或出庭后拒绝作证，其庭前证言真实性无法确认的，不得作为定案的根据。
法院对辩护理由的回应也是老大难问题。被告人或辩护律师当庭发表的罪轻或无罪的辩护意见或提交的证据，有些判决书中丝毫没有体现，这对查清案件非常不利。对此，最高法规定，对于被告人及其辩护人提出的辩解理由、辩护意见和提交的证据材料，应当当庭或者在裁判文书中说明采纳与否及理由。
法院不得与公安和检察院联合办案
快读：《意见》规定，法院不得参与公安机关、人民检察院联合办案。
虽然我国宪法规定了公检法机关应相互配合、相互制约，但司法实践中，三部门配合有余、制约不足，甚至在一些案件开始侦查时公检法就联合办案，使得侦查后的审判只是走走形式。
《意见》对审判人员的权责进行了明确，要求建立健全审判人员权责一致的办案责任制。审判人员依法履行职责，不受追究。审判人员办理案件违反审判工作纪律或者徇私枉法的，依照有关审判工作纪律和法律的规定追究责任。
《意见》还要求重视辩护人的监督和制约，规定保障辩护人会见、阅卷、调查取证等辩护权利。辩护人申请调取可能证明被告人无罪、罪轻的证据，应当准许。意见还要求加强社会监督，规定重大、疑难、复杂案件，可以邀请人大代表、政协委员、基层群众代表等旁听观审。
最高法：
将完善重大冤错案件分析通报制
南都讯 昨天，记者就最高法防范冤假错案工作意见出台采访最高法刑三庭负责人。该负责人介绍，最高法还将完善重大冤错案件分析通报制度。对于实践中发现的重大冤错案件，要对照《意见》的要求认真查找问题，深入剖析根源，确保已发生的问题不再发生，可能存在的问题及时得到解决。
“实践表明，错误的执法理念和司法观念，是导致冤假错案的深层次原因。只有彻底纠正那些不符合法治精神的错误观念和做法，才能消除冤假错案再次发生的现实危险”，该负责人说。
最新动作
最高法开通官微、微信
南都讯 最高法昨日在新浪网开通官方微博@最高人民法院，在腾讯网开通官方微信(公众号：最高人民法院)，并通过微博发布《意见》内容。据了解，最高法官微，是第一个国家级官微。南都记者发现，截至昨晚9时，官微已发布7条微博，粉丝涨至9万。
最高法院相关负责人介绍，官微也是司法公开的举措之一，该官微将及时发布各级人民法院的重大审判信息、重要司法解释和重要新闻信息等。官微、微信还将与最高法官网开设的“院长信箱”“代表委员建言”“失信被执行人名单查询”等栏目联动。
新闻回顾
纠正防范冤假错案举措
●2010年，最高法、最高检、公安部、司法部、安全部联合出台《关于办理死刑案件审查判断证据若干问题的规定》和《关于办理刑事案件排除非法证据若干问题的规定》，被称为“两个证据规定”，对完善刑事证据制度、确保办案质量发挥重要作用。2012年，其中的主要内容在刑事诉讼法修改过程中被吸收为法律规定。
●2013年8月，中央政法委出台首个防止冤假错案的指导意见，要求法官、检察官、人民警察在职责范围内对办案质量要终身负责，并建立健全冤假错案的责任追究机制。在党的十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》中，对健全错案防止机制也提出了明确要求。
●2013年11月2 1日，最高法公布《关于建立健全防范刑事冤假错案工作机制的意见》。
A 12-14版采写：
南都记者 王殿学
实习生 闫坤 发自北京
综合新华电
(原标题：冻饿晒烤疲劳审讯 所得口供应排除)
赞