An Empirical Study About Our Withdraw Prosecution System

National People’s Congress revised the Code of criminal procedure on14March2012.It doesn’t provide a criminal indictment withdrawal rights. But in practice of judicial process, the Procuratorate implements withdrawal rights in accordance with section242, paragraph5of Issues related with the implementation of the Supreme Court interpreted the Criminal Procedure Code and Section459of the rules of criminal procedure provisions. Therefore, in the view of academic part,"withdrawal right" is beyond judicial interpretation of the provisions of the legislation. It should be abolished. Another part of the view is that the withdrawal rights of the Procuratorate also has some value in judicial practice, Therefore, it is necessary to find the problem targeted to improve the system of withdrawal of cases on the basis of our criminal indictment.In addition to the preface and conclusion, this article is divided into five parts. It has more than20,000words.The first part, the basis of withdrawal rights.The second part, the Public Prosecution typical withdrawal basic circumstances of the case from2009to2013. The first, it is the process of cases of public prosecution typical withdrawal and the public prosecutor handling the case of the court. The second, the analysis of withdrawal of the Public Prosecution typical withdrawal cause combined with the reason for withdrawal statistics of our City C indictable cases, from2009to2013. Third, the public prosecutor handling the case typical withdrawal after the prosecution withdrew the case combined with the handling of the city C from2009to2011after the withdrawal of public prosecution cases. Fourth, the effects of Public Prosecution typical case withdrawal from2009to2013.The third part, the validation of the withdrawal of public prosecution system. First, the withdrawal of prosecution system is a manifestation of the right of public prosecution discretionary. Second, withdraw prosecution system is a way for different countries to meet the needs of the general litigation practice. The third, indictment was withdrawn efficiency of the proceedings, litigation achieve economic needs. The fourth, withdraw Prosecution is an objective need for judicial practice.The fourth part, the problems of withdrawal of public prosecution system. First, the legislative aspects, the second for procedural issues, the first withdrawal of the subject requirement is not clear, then the withdrawal of the time and frequency requirements are not clear, then the effectiveness of the withdrawal of the unknown, and then after treatment withdrawal is not clear, and finally the withdrawal the control mechanism is imperfect. Third, judicial practice. Fourth, the parties rights litigation and relief issues were first guilty verdict, and the defendant’s right to know, is a national compensation Moreover, finally, the right of victims and their legal representatives regarding the application protest.The fifth part, the improvements and standardizations of withdrawal of public prosecution the system. The first, legislation clearly stipulates the withdrawal of public prosecution system. Second, to improve the system of public prosecution to withdraw the applicable procedures, the first is to further clarify the provisions of the withdrawal of the subject, then, clearly stipulates the withdrawal of the time, and then after treatment withdrawal is clearly the case, the parties finally clear right to relief. Third, to establish a comprehensive supervision mechanism. First, judicial supervision, and internal supervision of prosecutors, prosecutors were established at a higher level for approval to withdraw the prosecution system and strict prosecution system of internal audit checks. Fourth, to establish a scientific evaluation mechanism.