An Investigation Report On The Adoption Of Administrative Enforcement Evidence In Criminal Proceedings

Although administrative and criminal offenses are legislated independently in China,an administrative offense may,in some cases,bring about criminal liability due to its excessively vicious circumstances or consequence.In such case,it is always necessary that the administrative agency involved remove the case to a proper judicial authority,thus incurring the issue of legal connection between administrative enforcement and criminal justice(hereinafter shortened as two-law connection).Under the framework of such "two-law connection",the evidence collected by executive branches is what’s mainly removed.However,as to the extent to which such evidence can be adopted and in which way it can be adopted has been under bitter controversy for a long time,academically or practically.Although paragraph 2,article 52 of Criminal Procedural Law(the 2012 version)has already established a framework for the adoption of the evidence collected by executive branches in criminal proceedings,many problems are still left to be solved in judicial practice with a negative impact on the efficient operation of the "two-law connection".For example,the still vague meaning of "etc" in paragraph 2,article 52 of Criminal Procedural Law(the 2012 version)always lead to misunderstanding,judicial authority never endeavors to recollect certain kind of verbal evidence,examination report and expert opinion are often messed up,judges are more biased for the authenticity of evidence.Based on the collected scoring materials,questionnaires and referee instruments,together with the help of the interviews with relevant judicial personnel,the writer will first extract in this paper the problems found in the adoption of the evidence in criminal proceedings collected by executive branches,then analyze the cause thereof,and at last try to work out some proposal for efficient improvement accordingly.This essay consists of three parts,namely,introduction,main body and conclusion.The main body is further divided into three parts with about twenty thousand words.The first part thereof is focused on the theoretical basis on which the evidence collected by the executive branches is adopted practically in criminal proceedings.The writer will first introduce in this part the institutional framework,or solve how the evidence collected by executive branches is adopted as the evidence in criminal proceedings for the efficient operation of the "two-law connection",and then try to prove from three aspects the legitimacy of the evidence collected by executive branches as the evidence adopted in criminal proceedings.That is,the object of proof assumes overlapping to a certain degree,evidence-collecting requirements share some similarity and it helps to enhance the efficiency of litigation.Finally,the writer will try to illustrate the blemish existing in the adoption of the evidence through its violation of the statutory principles of authority and consequent weakening effect on the authenticity of the evidence.The second part thereof involves the judicial practice of the adoption of the abovementioned evidence in criminal proceedings.The objects and methods of the research herein is first introduced,followed by a further introduction to the outstanding problems found in judicial practice,including such four aspects as that the vague meaning of "etc" in paragraph 2,article 52 of Criminal Procedural Law(the 2012 version)always lead to misunderstanding,judicial authority never endeavor to recollect some verbal evidence,examination report and expert opinion are messed up,judges are more biased for the authenticity of evidence.Finally,based on the two proposed reasons as the unbreakable entity realism and the unclear legislation,another thoughtful analysis of the major problems found in judicial practice is attempted.In the third part thereof,the writer presents some practical improvement suggestions for the adoption of the abovementioned evidence in criminal proceedings and puts forward effective solutions to the problems found in judicial practice accordingly.Namely,adhering strictly to the principle of procedural law,further clarifying the legal norms,defining strictly the exceptional circumstances,and improving the guarantee mechanism.