Case Analysis Of Controlled Delivery

“Controlled Delivery” is an investigative measure that widely used in punishing special crimes such as drugs.It refers to the investigation method that the investigation agency has discovered the crime,but not caught it on the spot,meanwhile,the agency fully monitors it and allows it continue to be implemented under surveillance,and when the criminal act touches other criminal suspects,then the agency will capture them.At first,the investigation method was only applied to drug dealing crime.After decades of continuous development,it has gradually become a powerful weapon to effectively against drug crimes and corruption crimes.In 1988,the United Nations promulgated the “Convention on the Suppression of Illegal Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances” which recognized the legality of “controlled delivery” in the form of an international convention for the first time.China also ratified and joined the convention in the following year.In 2012,the “controlled delivery” was recognized in the form of domestic legislation,which clarified its legal status.The article selects three representative cases of “controlled delivery” for analysis,and summarizes three controversies focuses: first of all,whether “controlled delivery”belongs to the temptation investigation;secondly,the legitimacy of the application of“controlled delivery”;and finally,the issue of the evidential capacity and probative power of the evidence mastered by “controlled delivery”.Based on the analysis of the above controversial focus,expand and prospect on this basis,and combined with China’s national conditions and judicial practice experience to put forward ideas on the improvement of domestic application of controlled delivery: first of all,improve the legal provisions related to controlled delivery measures.Although China’s criminal procedure law has made relevant provisions on controlled delivery,the legislative content is too general,which is not conducive to the implementation of the investigation stage,and needs to be clarified by legislation.Secondly,clarify the criminal form standards of controlled delivery measures.There are still disputes in the theoretical circle for the confirmation of the crime form of controlled delivery,but the data of judicial practice show that people’s courts at all levels in our country are more inclined to recognize the crime of controlled delivery as accomplished crime.Thirdly,to construct the evidence system applicable to the measure of controlled delivery,there is only one article stipulating the issue of controlled delivery of evidence in China’s criminal procedure law,which is undoubtedly disadvantageous to require the comprehensive collection of evidence under the background of judicial reform centered on trial.The legal regulations should be imposed on the collection of evidence,authentication,illegal evidence exclusion,and fixed evidence.Finally,the establishment of an internal review and external supervision mechanism for the application of controlled delivery measures is undoubtedly a major improvement to the controlled delivery.The establishment of a standardized internal review and external supervision mechanism is conducive to standardizing the procedures of controlled delivery,establishing the authority of the investigation agency,and to protect the human rights of criminal suspects.