Researches On The Application Of DNA Analysis Technique In Criminal Actions

DNA analysis technique has been widely used in criminal actions since a case involving immigrant's paternity test was successfully solved through the technique of DNA fingerprints in 1985. There is worldwide consensus on using DNA analysis technique to help clearing up cases and cracking down crimes, and good results have been attained. DNA evidence can help to lock the criminal suspects with the accuracy of 99.9999%, exclude an individual with the accuracy of 100%. The application of DNA database is a powerful technical support to clearing up cases rapidly, and provides the court trials with persuasive evidence. Though of course the DNA identification has its quality of being scientific and objectivity, the person who conducts evaluation is of subjectivity, and the process of the DNA examination is complicated and difficult and has many links; new techniques in this field are constantly emerging, therefore, it is very important to regularize the techniques of great potential. At present, there exist many problems in the procedure and the using of DNA analysis techniques in the field of criminal judicature of our country. There are no procedural regulations on DNA analysis techniques to safeguard the collection, storage and operation of DNA evidence in our country. There is short of a management mechanism of DNA analysis techniques."Science and technology is a double-edged sword". Only after having been admitted and regularized by the law, can DNA evidence function as scientific and technological evidence in the judicial field, otherwise, it may be abused or misused. In the present legal system of DNA identification in our country, there exist the problems that the administrative system is in confusion and rules on identification are not identical. The judicial cost is increased, for there is no authorized central controlling institution, multiparty identification and repeated identification occur sometimes, the conclusions of which are different and difficult to coordinate. The lack of the unified management system of DNA analysis technique resulted in the differences in the identification institutions, the examination methods and the procedures, and the experts'qualifications. Which conclusion of the expert evaluation from different identification institutions and different experts is more scientific and admissible? When not knowing which conclusion of the expert evaluation is better, a judge can only judge by his own subjective understanding and right of discretion. Under the circumstances of judicial corruption and injustice in our country, the free judgment can very easily lead to the result of some judges'arbitrariness of judicial judgment, causing unjust, famed-up and wrong cases.DNA evidence is one of the seven kinds of evidence prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Law of the PRC. The study on the application of DNA evidence in the criminal judicial procedure should be concentrated on its effect. The so-called evidence effect refers to the evidence, after having been examined according to legal procedure by judicial functionary or having been provided by the litigants and cross-examined by the court, is confirmed to be the factual basis of determining the case. If the process of collecting it is illegal, the evidence cannot be adopted as the basis to determine a case, even though it has weight of proof. Legal procedure excludes not only false evidence, but also illegal evidence. The DNA identification conclusion reflects the authenticity of a case only when it is lawful.There exist problems in the cross-examination of DNA identification conclusions. Legislature and judicial interpretation for the expert's appearance in court as a witness is not perfect in our country. Some people do not have enough knowledge of the cross-examination of judicial identification conclusions. The experts are not willing to or dare not appear in court as witnesses, because there lack of systems of compensation for the experts'appearance in court as witnesses and protecting the experts. In criminal action, there is no system of"expert attorney", the result of which is that the litigants and their agents cannot put forward reasons to support their own claims because of the lack of special knowledge concerning judicial identification technique.The criminal action is gradually becoming more dependent on DNA evidence because of the constant development of DNA analysis technique, so DNA evidence is often used as a key proof to a court decision. Comparing with developed countries, the legislature of our country on DNA analysis technique is rather slow. So we should take in advanced experience from developed countries.China should set up as early as possible the procedural regulations on DNA collection, storage and experiment operation to perfect the procedure of DNA identification in criminal actions.We should construct a management system of DNA identification to guarantee its justice and fairness. Our country's judicial administrative organs should be assigned as the competent authorities of DNA identification institutions to manage, supervise and coordinate the establishment and operation of other local identification institutions. We should deposit various existing identification institutions differently to change the disordered situation. It is imperative to unify the standard of the quality control of DNA identification technique combined with the current level of the development of DNA technology and the present situation of its application in China.We should perfect the procedure of the cross-examination of DNA identification conclusions to overcome blindly ready belief of DNA evidence. We should perfect criminal procedure law and evidence rules, and establish a complete system of the expert's appearance in court as a witness through clarifying the expert's compulsory presence obligation, regularizing the legal circumstances of exceptions for expert's presence, establishing the system of right guarantee for the experts that present in court as witnesses; setting up a system of evidence display before opening a session, perfect the system of"expert attorney", making the detailed rules for the implementation of inviting"expert attorney", perfect the cross inquiry procedure of identification conclusion.The procedural examining rules should be perfected to examine whether the identification has admissibility.The related rules of judge authentication should be perfected to confirm whether the conclusion can be used as the basis of determining a case.