The Amendment Of The Criminal Procedure Law &Nbsp; The Gaps That Need To Be Filled Urgently.

"," nightmares ","

The death of the detainees in the detention center is endless.

This makes some grass-roots public security departments and procuratorial organs struggling to cope with public opinion crisis.

From the perspective of their status and authority, the grass-roots departments pay more attention to the settlement of cases, and the top-down detention house is only a temporary solution.

The way to cure this is to reform the management system of detention houses.

It is precisely because the detention center belongs to the public security department that under the bad habits of "taking the custody of the agent", the repair of the new suspect becomes the encouraging rule of some management, or at least the default rule.

Why does the rate of abnormal death in detention centres far exceed that of prison?

This is not a prison manager's strong management ability, but rather a deep institutional root.

Most of the jurisprudential view holds that only by allowing the public security department to lose direct leadership over the detention center, the detention center will not give the green light to "prison prison tyrants" and torture.

Exclusionary rule

"But in what system to curb torture, it is dull.

The legal profession and lawyers have long appealed for the right to be present.

Think of it, torture often occurs in confined space (mostly in the detention center managed by the public security department), which lacks witness and is difficult to obtain material evidence in time.

To curb the existence of torture, we can not expect the conscience of the executioner to wake up, nor can we expect the victim to appeal everywhere.

Torture victims are usually not legal professionals. They often lose personal liberty at the time of the crime.

The presence of lawyers can solve this problem.

With the presence of a lawyer, the suspect will receive professional help from lawyers, including the process of witness questioning.

A lawyer, a "outsider", can not continue to see torture.

As an external supervision mechanism, the lawyer's presence right is able to undertake the mission of supervision legitimation and procedure. However, the opportunity to enter the law is lost.

Rights and interests protection

。

In 1996, the criminal procedure law overhauled the victim to the status of "litigants", highlighting the efforts of legislation in protecting the rights and interests of litigants.

But in the past 15 years, the victim has been wearing the aura of the "litigant" and is hard to get along with his reputation.

Take the case of Li Changkui as an example, the victim's family members have not received the notice of the second instance, nor have they received the final judgment of the court of second instance.

In accordance with the provisions of the current execution law, the victim or his close relatives have no right to appeal against the criminal part of the case.

The second instance procedure does not refer to the "victim", nor is it clear that the "parties" should be involved in the trial. Many courts thus understood that the second instance should not be notified of the victims and their close relatives.

Although this method can reduce the risk of the petitioners and their families to choose petitions within a certain time limit, the seeds of conflict have been planted in advance.

In addition, there are few judgments in China's criminal incidental civil action.

This "difficulty in execution" has undoubtedly caused two injuries to the victims and their families.

The victim's national compensation system can help the victim out of poverty and distress caused by the crime in a certain sense.

The revised criminal procedure law sticks to the basic standpoint of "the defendant's standard" and returns to the principle of "equal protection of the accused's defendants".