The Research Of The Cirminal Procedure Sanctions In China

“One miscarriage of justice is more serious than ten criminalities. The criminality breaks the law butthe miscarriage of justice destroys the law.” The breaking of the procedure causes most of the miscarriagesof justice. These miscarriages of justice are not only harm for the criminals and inductees, but also harm forthe justness of law. There are sanctions from the appropriate substantive law to amerce the violations of thelaw. Such as criminal penalties, state compensation, and other administrative disciplinary. Though thesemeasures can curb the violations of procedural law behaviors, this effect is very limited. In order to amercethe violations of procedural law behaviors, many western countries established both substantive sanctionsand special procedures of the sanctions regime. For example, the common law countries established theillegal exclusionary rule and quash an indictment system. Also, overthrow the guilt trial referee system.Civil law countries have established a system of legal action invalid. Comparing with the developedcountries, the development of the system of procedural sanctions is very slow in China. The remandprovisions of the first revision of the Code of Criminal Procedure in1996. Then in1998“the SupremePeople’s Law of a number issues of interpretation” set forth in the illegal evidence exclusion rules havefinalized in the form of law. It’s a huge step forward for the Criminal Procedure Law that the number ofremand of the grounds of insufficient evidence is limited to once. In all, until now, there are only two kindsof the procedures of the sanctions regime in Chinese Criminal Procedure Law. One is illegal evidenceexclusion rules and cassation. The other is retrial system. Comparing with the developed countries, there issome discrepancy in both sanction and punishment. The lack of legislation, law enforcement and low will lead to the problems of the judicial practice,according to the provisions of China’s existing laws, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of generallybinding should be widely used in the trial of cases. However, the legal professions are disappointed, beforethe case of Zhang Guoxi in Zhejiang Province, there is no case all over China can use the Regulations onhandling the criminal case to exclude illegal evidence. Obviously, There are a lot of deficiencies in both thelegislation and the judicial practice of the two types of procedural sanctions regime in China.In this article, First of all, we will introduce the concept of procedural sanctions. There is a simpleanalysis of the more widely used illegal evidence exclusion rule; a termination of the proceedings, legalaction is invalid, and the lifting of custody system. Then, there is the status of the elaborated China’sprocedural system of sanctions and the analysis of the procedural inadequacies of the sanctions regime. Wewill point out the reason for this predicament, and give some advice to lay the foundation for the next step.At last, in the discussion of the Improvement of procedural sanctions regime, we will give suggestions infour aspects. In addition, we will give advice on how to improve China’s program of the sanctions regime.