The Institutional Transformation and Theoretical Turn of China's Criminal Evidence Law: from the Perspective of Exclusionary Rule

万毅,林喜芬,何永军
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-2397.2008.04.014
2008-01-01
Abstract:At the beginning of the 20th century,a violent debate arose over in American legal circles while Evidence scholar John Wigmore and legal reformist Conner Hall stood on the opposite sides of the debate.The historical contribution of their arguments lies in that it results in two significant topics in modern Western evidence law: whether evidence law should center on truth-seeking or admissibility;how should the relationship between application of evidence rules and establishment of criminal procedures be regulated.Introduction of exclusionary rule is an important issue while people intend to re-amend the Criminal Procedural Act of the PRC.Historical similarities of the controversies among Chinese criminal evidence scholars to the disputes between Wigmore and Hall are too many to be ignorant.Since its legislation stresses truth-seeking rather than admissibility,China is now in a plight while applying its evidence rules.In addition,the backwardness of its studies of evidence also hinders theoretical research from being independent.To solve the dilemma,scholars in criminal evidence field should consider the institutional transformation of China's criminal evidence law,which means to establish a system of evidence rules based on admissibility to prevent misjudgment and to balance values.Meanwhile,it is expected that China's evidence studies will take a theoretical turn,i.e.a turn to jurisprudence,a turn to human rights law,and a turn to a separate evidence law opposite to substantial law.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?