Modern Liberal Heart Permit System Value

This paper tracks back, first of all, in history to the development of the inner conviction system, explains its characteristics of historical selection, and at the same time suggests that the inner conviction system has grown up from its tradition to a modern stage. Then, it searches the basic features and connotation of the modern inner conviction system. Through the analysis of the foundation of the philosophy of law, the system's rationality and validity has been clarified. Emphasizing particularly on the adjective law in criminal litigation procedures and the features and functioning of judicial power, the paper advances the characteristic value of the inner conviction system and the tentative plan to establish modern inner conviction system in our country.The writer thinks that much the same as the development of human beings from barbarism to civilization and from obscuration to science, the evidence system has also been developing from divinity evidence system to legal evidence system, and then to inner conviction system. The fundamental position of evidence system in procedural jurisprudence is justified by the characteristics of litigation itself. The procedure of litigation is one that investigates into the facts and evidences and ascertains the reality. According to the principles of evidence judicature, evidence plays the key role in modern litigation. On the one hand, the handling of the entity of a lawsuit relies initially on the feasibility of identifying the reality. On the other hand, the integrity of evidence system can normalize the legal activities in the country's specialized agencies, protect litigious rights, and realize justice in legal procedures. The modern inner conviction system is internationally identified under the precondition of critically inheriting the traditional inner conviction system. The characteristic value of the modern inner conviction system in criminal proceedings embodies the following five aspects: 1) it meets the requirements of epistemology in criminal proceedings; 2) it provides a reasonable space for the operation of judicial power; 3) it provides protection for the functioning of criminal proceedings and for the realization of value objectives; 4) it is the necessary need to bring the structure of criminal proceedings into action; 5) it sets up mutual boarders with the making and operating of the rule of evidence.