The Research On Evidence Disclosure System In Cases Of Pleading Guilty And Accepting Punishments

As a recently established and focused judicial system in China,the setting up of various procedures and the improvement of the system are still in the process of continuous discussion and advancement,both in legislation and judicial practice.Exploring the system of evidence discovery in plea cases is a key element of the system’s continued development for the better.However,the theoretical controversies concerning the construction of a specialized evidence discovery system and the vagueness of the relevant legal provisions and the lack of uniformity in practice around the world have hindered the system’s advancement.The system of evidence discovery in plea cases should be constructed under the perspective of rights protection.There is a practical need to establish a special system of evidence discovery in plea cases.The right of discovery and the right to read the file overlap in function,and the two systems can complement each other and go hand in hand.The discovery of evidence in plea cases has the following functions: to make up for the weakness of the book-reading system,to guarantee the suspect’s right to know,to guarantee the voluntariness and authenticity of the suspect’s plea,to promote equal and full consultation between the prosecution and the defense,and to support the formulation of accurate sentencing recommendations.In the consultative justice,the evidence disclosure system for plea cases has a special meaningful value.In practice,the regulations and trial of evidence discovery in plea cases highlight the color of the exercise of power,deviating from the correct purpose of safeguarding the suspect’s right to know,the voluntariness and truthfulness of the plea.The logic of the exercise of power treats the procedure of evidence discovery as a tool to promote criminal suspects to plead guilty and punishments,which is not conducive to the voluntariness and authenticity of guilty pleas.In contrast,the existence of the logic of rights guarantee is based on the defendant’s status as a subject of litigation,the concept of equal arms between the prosecution and the defense,and the legality of the plea procedure,and should be used as the theoretical basis to construct the evidence discovery procedure in plea cases.Regarding the specific design of the evidence discovery system,the four aspects of the conditions of application,scope of discovery,subjects and objects of discovery,and ways of initiation are discussed respectively.In the applicable stage,the evidence should be disclosed before the signing of the guilty plea in the examination and prosecution stage;in the applicable case scope,in principle,all cases in which a guilty plea is proposed should be disclosed.The disclosure of evidence should adhere to the principle of two-way disclosure in accordance with the law,but does not mean reciprocal disclosure.The procuratorial authorities shall assume the primary obligation to disclose evidence,and the suspect shall only assume the secondary obligation to disclose evidence.The suspect should be the subject of discovery,and should ensure the presence of the defense or duty counsel.The content of the disclosure of evidence should be fully disclosed as a principle,involving national security,commercial secrets,personal privacy and other special circumstances for the exception.The procuratorial authorities can actively start the evidence disclosure procedures ex officio,while the suspect has the right to apply for evidence disclosure.To provide a perfect and effective guarantee mechanism for the smooth implementation of the evidence disclosure system in plea and punishment leniency cases.On the one hand,the macro level needs the cooperation of the duty lawyer system to enhance the effect of legal help and coordinate with the whole process of plea of guilty and punishment;on the micro level,it is necessary to further standardize the process of evidence discovery,fully fulfill the obligation to inform the rights and risks,clarify the time and place of discovery,and refine the specific way of discovery.On the other hand,it is necessary to improve the defendant’s rights relief mechanism,clearly give and strengthen the defendant’s right to seek relief;from the procedural and substantive dimensions to provide effective remedies for the defendant;improve the application of evidence disclosure motivation and quality,and establish "assessment and accountability" one of the supervision mechanism.