The Research On Designated Residential Surveillance

Designated residential surveillance has played a notable role since 2013 January 1 when the new criminal procedure law began to take effect, especially in providing system guarantee for investigation of the major bribery cases. At the same time there are some problems that cannot be ignored, to what we need to make some responses.The criminal procedure law’s amending about designated residential surveillance in 2012 reflected the idea to balance the protection of human rights and ensuring the smooth criminal litigations, and when they conflict legislators focus more on the former. The above ideas will guide the construction of the specific recommendations in my paper. Compared with other coercive measures, designated residential surveillance has the unique characteristics of the two aspects of mandatory and applicable results. But the unique characteristics are not enough to change its basic properties. It is a kind of non-mandatory measures according to the definition of detention and non-detention.There are some problems that need to be solved in the application. To address these issues, I think the relevant standards should be clear and the discretion of the judiciary should be limited. Second, that place of execution is not clear and the shackles of the traditional concept of handling the case result in improper execution mode resulting in human rights violations, and dislocation of the subject of execution. To address these problems, I think the most fundamental solution is to establish a centralized implementation site, which has the feasibility. The specific implementation should be based on the different types of designated residential surveillance. Third, the provisions of the rights of the people being monitored are inadequate. For the problem, notifying the family members, judicial authorities should unify the content for notifying, which should include the reasons for designated residential surveillance and the place for the implementation, and unify the cases leading to the fact that investigators are unable to notify the family of the one who under surveillance what should take the Criminal procedure rules of the people’s Procuratorate as the standard. The object notified, dependent, should be expanded to explain. The supervision of the cases leading to the fact that investigators are unable to notify the family of the one who under surveillance should be strengthened. To avoid extorting a confession by torture, supporting measures should be established after Detention house Ordinance. Given that the designated residential surveillance for three kinds of special crimes limits the freedom of the suspect and the accused to a great extent and is longer-term, the corresponding national compensation system should be established. Fourth, the rules of procuratorial supervision are not perfect. The mode of supervision should be detailed, including a clear mandate to start initiatively, the establishment of the record review system and the provisions of the review time. The guarantee mechanism for procuratorial supervision shall be established, for example, the procuratorial organs may recommend the organ supervised to replace the relevant personnel or to give the corresponding punishment. The necessity of censorship should be improved. The scope of review shall be extended to the designated residential surveillance for three kinds of special crimes. The review body should be changed into the supervision department for investigation of the People’s Procuratorate at the next higher level.In terms of the system itself, based on fairness and the reason for taking designated residential surveillance, I think the designated residential surveillance for no fixed abode should not apply to subtraction of term of penalty and this kind of marked man can live with his or her families.