A Study On The Necessity Of Detention After Arrest

The system of reviewing the necessity of detention has always been a key research topic in the Criminal Procedure Law.It is closely related to the detention of criminal suspects and defendants before judgment,and it is directly related to their personal freedom rights.Since the establishment of the system in the Criminal Procedure Law in 2012,and subsequent amendments and additions,it has played a certain role in reducing China's high detention rate.However,compared with western countries,the detention rate in our country is too high,and the phenomenon of overtime detention still exists.First of all,before solving the problem,we should analyze and define the relevant concepts of the review system of the necessity of detention after arrest to understand its inherent nature and its theoretical basis.Our scholar Chen Weidong believes that it is a quasi-judicial nature and does not have judicial review.The nature,but judging from the existing criminal procedural norms,it is the nature of the legal supervision exercised by the procuratorate.In this article,the author analyzes the legislation and judicial practice of the system in China,and draws out some problems in theory and practice of the system in China.For example,because the review standards and the content of the review are not clear enough,procuratorial organs have made different decisions on the same situation.If they are not satisfied with the review decision and have not established corresponding relief measures,some law enforcement personnel's handling concepts have not been transformed.This has led to several reasons for the low application rate of the system in China.In view of this,the author analyzes and compares the system between China and some foreign countries,and concludes that in some foreign countries,neutral judges are the subject of custody review,which has the nature of judicial review and can keep the review results objective and fair.When a criminal suspect or defendant is dissatisfied with the results of the review,he or she can defend his or her remedy rights through a complaint channel.For example,Germany,Japan,the United States,the United Kingdom and other countries have provided detention relief measures.In order to improve the problems in the custody necessity review system in China,thecomparative study on the basis of summing up the relevant experience of some countries outside the region.For example,we can use quantitative assessment methods to solve the problems of review content and review standards,improve the recommendations of alternative measures for detention,and when we are dissatisfied with the results of the review,we can use the provisions of countries outside the region to establish relief measures,and also establish the necessity of detention regularly The review system and case-handling personnel should also change their concepts during the review,fully protect the lawful rights and interests of the person being prosecuted,and make these an important part of the review system for the necessity of detention.