The Study On Application Of Administrative Law Enforcement Evidence In Criminal Justice

Article 52 paragraph(2) of “the criminal procedure law” and relevant judicial interpretations have entitled administrative law enforcement evidence to be used as criminal evidence, it fills a long time gap left in the law in terms of the application of administrative law enforcement evidence in criminal justice. The provisions set out the types of administrative law enforcement evidence which can be used in criminal justice, so as to avoid the drawbacks of evidence transformation rules and limit the arbitrariness of using administrative law enforcement evidence by judicial officers in judicial practice. But some problems that cannot be neglected have resulted from the carelessness of the provision itself and some other factors, they are hampering the further convergence of administrative law enforcement evidence and criminal justice evidence. In this paper, using a combination method of empirical analysis and normative analysis, elaborating the background and basis of the application system of the administrative law enforcement in criminal justice, analyzing the problems and shortcomings based on the operation of the system, and then put forward some suggestions of perfect.In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper encompasses three parts, and about 29,000 words.The first part is the interpretation of the application system of administrative law enforcement evidence in criminal justice. First of all, analyzing the system by defining administrative law enforcement evidence and interpreting Article 52 paragraph( 2) of “the criminal procedure law”. Secondly, supporting the system by explaining that the application of administrative law enforcement evidence in criminal justice can be theoretical possibility and realistic rationality.The second part is the investigation of the application of administrative law enforcement evidence in criminal justice in practice. This part is the main part of the paper. On the one hand, we learn the application status of Article 52 paragraph(2) of “the criminal procedure law” and relevant judicial interpretations through investigations of the public security organ、procuratorate and people’s court in the P county and C county of W city,thus it is propitious to find the problems in the judicial practice. The explanation of the application status is mainly about the forensic subject、scope and examination of administrative law enforcement evidence which can be used in criminal justice. On the other hand, based on operating situation and relevant articles, we analyze the problems. The main problems include the abuse of testimonial evidence、the lack of evidence review mechanism、the definition issue of evidence which obtained by joint investigation between administrative organ and investigation organ、the possibility of violating the legal rights of the suspect and the defendant, and the lack of relevant supporting system.The third part is about the further perfection and implement of the application system of administrative law enforcement evidence in criminal justice. This part focuses on making recommendations for the problems which were proposed in the second part. On one hand, improving the application system of administrative law enforcement evidence on the basis of the present legal provisions. Perfect measures include: Firstly, specifying the types of the administrative law enforcement evidence which can be used in the criminal justice: real evidence such as physical evidence、documentary evidence、 audio-video materials、electronic data evidence 、 inspection and examination graphology 、 records made on the scene; identification opinion、 confession of the people involved 、witness testimony and litigant states under statutory situations; Secondly, establishing the examination mechanism for the administrative law enforcement evidence, it includes: specifying the subject、standards、details and noteworthy problems of the examination mechanism; Thirdly, reviewing the evidence which are used in criminal justice by both administrative and criminal illegal evidence exclusion rule. On the other hand, improving related ancillary system. It mainly refers to the system of administrative law enforcement officials’ testifying before the court.