| The investigation and evidence collection system of defense lawyers in China is not mature.The basic right of self-investigation and evidence collection is often rejected by relevant units or individuals due to lack of coercive force.The supplementary application for investigation and evidence collection power is due to the opposition of the procuratorate to the defender in the litigation position.Roles and the court’s unwillingness to take responsibility due to litigation cost considerations,resulting in that the right cannot be guaranteed,and the defender’s application for investigation and evidence collection is rejected,and there is no corresponding relief procedure and means.Therefore,improving the defense lawyer’s investigation and evidence collection system has become an urgent need in current judicial practice.A real problem solved.This article cuts into this issue.First,through the historical research method,it analyzes the contents of the previous revisions and finds that the problem of "difficulty in investigation" of defense lawyers has not been fundamentally solved;secondly,it explains the connotation and characteristics of the defense lawyer’s right to investigate and collect evidence,and passes Comparative research methods,comparative analysis of whether defense lawyers have the obligation of investigating and collecting evidence and the standards of proof,found that the West has made clear regulations on whether defense lawyers have the obligation of investigating and collecting evidence and has a unified standard of proof,while China’s relevant regulations are relatively lacking.And there are big differences in the standard of proof;then,through literature research and case study methods,the current situation of China’s defense lawyers’ investigation and evidence collection from the three perspectives of legislation,justice,and litigation concepts is systematically explained,and its causes are analyzed;finally,it is aimed at For the above-discovered problems. |