Abstract

The exclusion of illegally obtained evidence has long been the focus of theoretical research and legislative reform in China. After years of efforts, the exclusionary rule has finally found a foothold in Chinese statute. However, after the exclusionary rule has been officially established, the initial fervour for reform has given way to a difficult slog of changing actual practice. This article is based on a comprehensive empirical survey on the implementation of the exclusionary rule conducted by the author as the primary investigator. This article will address three key issues that stood out in the empirical surveys: the definition and scope of illegally obtained confession, proof of illegally obtained confession, and suppression hearing. In addressing each issue, the author will follow the similar structure: first share the empirical findings on the implementation of the exclusionary rule across the country, then examine the contributing factors causing the failure of implementation and identify the existing challenges that China encountered in implementing the new rules, and finally put forward some potential solutions to these problems based on comparative study and China’s special situation.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.