The Perfection of the Chinese-style System of the Right to Silence
Abstract
For nearly half a century, China’s criminal procedure law has been developing in the direction of human rights protection, but it still has not established a perfect human rights judicial protection system. On the occasion of the fourth revision of the Criminal Procedure Law, it is proposed to establish a human rights protection system with the right to silence as the focus. The reason for this is that the premise of the right to silence is the principle of presumption of innocence, the right to silence is expressed the privilege against self-incrimination in the law of criminal procedure, the right to silence requires the cooperation of the right to defend by a lawyer, and the legal consequence of violating the right to silence is to exclude illegal access to evidence, and these systems in China’s Criminal Procedure Law are not perfect. Therefore, the construction of a Chinese-style right to silence is conducive to improving the human rights protection system in China’s Criminal Procedure Law. The Chinese-style right to silence system should add the principle of presumption of innocence, abolish the existing “truthful answers”, improve the right of lawyers to defend, introduce the right of lawyers to be present, and improve the rules for the exclusion of illegal evidence. It is necessary to use comparative methods to introduce mature experience from other countries to eliminate contradictions in the criminal justice system, and to find and improve the deficiencies in judicial practice, so as to achieve the goal of protecting human rights.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bai Dong. (2017). The controversy between truthful answers and the abolition of the right to silence. Nankai Journal (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), (3), 62-71.
Bai Rongjing. (2019). Changes and prospects of criminal procedure law research. Political and Legal Forum, 37(05).
Bi Xiqian. (2020). British police: From interrogation to investigative interviews. Police in the Modern World, (1).
Chen Guangzhong, Chen Qiongwen. (2024). Review and prospect of the revision of the criminal procedure law. Law Journal, 45(02).
Chen Weidong. (2024). Some thoughts on the fourth revision of the criminal procedure law. Political and Legal Review, (1).
Cornell, S. (2019). Reading the Constitution, 1787–91: History, originalism, and constitutional meaning. Law and History Review, 37(3), 821-845.
Criminal Law Research Center, China University of Political Science and Law. (1998). New development of the criminal procedure system in the United Kingdom (Report on investigation to the UK). Procedural Law Review, 2, 366.
Coendet, T. (2019). Critical legal orientalism. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 67(4), 775-824.
Donnelly, J. (2007). The relative universality of human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 29(2), 281-306.
Duckworth, A. L., Quirk, A., Gallop, R., Hoyle, R. H., Kelly, D. R., & Matthews, M. D. (2019). Cognitive and noncognitive predictors of success. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 116(47), 23499-23504.
Grady, J. S., Her, M., Moreno, G., Perez, C., & Yelinek, J. (2019). Emotions in storybooks: A comparison of storybooks that represent ethnic and racial groups in the United States. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8(3), 207-217.
Hall, K., & Cork, H. (2017). Back to basics: Reforming Australia’s private sector whistleblowing laws. In R. Levy, M. O’Brien, S. Rice, P. Ridge & M. Thornton (Eds.), New directions for law in Australia: Essays in contemporary law reform (pp. 93–101). Australian National University Press.
Han Dayuan, et al. (2020). Wells publishing agreement. In History of Chinese Constitutional Theory. William S. Hein & Co., Inc.
Han Xu. (2024). Expectations for the modernization of the rule of law in the fourth revision of the criminal procedure law. Political and Legal Review, (1), 53-68.
Hazlett, K. B. (1998). The nineteenth-century origins of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. The American Journal of Legal History, 42(3), 235-260.
Hygum, E., & Pedersen, P. M. (Eds.). (2010). Early childhood education: Values and practices in Denmark. Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Ingram, J. L. (2022). Criminal procedure: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Jackson, L. M. (2019). The psychology of prejudice: From attitudes to social action (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association.
Johnson, A. (2018, May 24). “It doesn’t need to be this way”: The promise of specialised early intervention in psychosis services. IEPA. https://iepa.org.au/network-news/it-doesnt-need-to-be-this-way-the-promise-of-specialised-early-intervention-in-psychosis-services/
Kamisar, Y. (2007). On the fortieth anniversary of the Miranda case: Why we needed it, how we got it — And what happened to it. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 163, 163-204.
Klarman, M. J. (2020). Two models of the right to not speak. Harvard Law Review, 134(1), 1-264.
Levy, L. W. (1969). The right against self-incrimination: History and judicial history. Political Science Quarterly, 84(1), 1-29.
Leo, R. A. (2001). Questioning the relevance of Miranda in the twenty-first century. Michigan Law Review, 99(5).
Liu Jianzhu. (2018). On the system of defendants’ right to silence in criminal proceedings. Legal System and Society, (27).
Maclin, T. (2023). Is silence golden? Arizona Law Review, 65(1), 43-112.
Song Yinghui. (1998). The principle of no self-blame and the obligation to truthfully declare. Legal Studies, (5), 142.
Song Zengce. (2020). A study on the waiver of criminal procedure rights. China University of Political Science and Law Press. p. 58.
Song Ping, Liu Yan. (2020). Visual analysis of research hotspots of investigation and interrogation methods. China Criminal Police, (1).
Spring, A., & Earl, C. (2018, May 22). How the diversity push is failing Australian fashion. The Guardian: Australia Edition. https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2018/may/22/just-not-blonde-how-the-diversity-push-is-failing-australian-fashion
Theophilopoulos, C. (2003). A brief descriptive analysis of the Anglo-American right to silence. Journal of South African Law, (2), 258-275.
Walker, C. P. (1980). An exploration of the right to silence. Anglo-American Law Review, (3), 257-278.
Wan Yi. (2012). On the interpretation and application of the clause “No compulsion of self-incrimination”. Legal Forum, 27(3), 141.
Wang Gang. (2024). Research on the protest mechanism of plea cases from the perspective of structuralism. Comparative Law Research, (3).
Wigler, C. (2020). Juvenile due process: Applying contract principles to ensure voluntary criminal confessions. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 168(5), 1425-1454.
Wu Yuhao. (2024). The effectiveness test of the normalization of the application of leniency for plea guilt and acceptance of punishment. China Jurisprudence, (3).
Xie Youping. (2024). Re-revision of the criminal procedure law from the perspective of rule of law modernization. Political and Legal Forum, 42(1).
Xie Youping. (2000). The relationship between the right to silence and the principle of presumption of innocence. Journal of the Central College of Political Science and Law Management Cadres, (2), 32-34.
Xu Han. (2021). On feasible measures to solve the judicial dilemma of “zero confession”. Legal System and Society, (10).
Yi Yanyou. (2000). The relationship between the right to silence and the principle of presumption of innocence. Journal of the Central College of Political Science and Law Management Cadres, (2), 32-34.
Yi Yanyou. (2000). Silent freedom. China Lawyer, (1), 50.
Zhang Jianwei. (2023). The opportunity and basic concept of recodification of criminal procedure. Research on the Rule of Law, (6).
Zheng Xuefei. (n.d.). On the use of investigative strategies and their legitimacy: Taking threats, inducements, and bullying in interrogation as the entry point. Journal of Jiangxi Police Institute, (6), 24, 41-46.
Zhou Guojun. (1999, January 2). Refusal to compel self-incrimination and the right to silence. Legal Daily, 7.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.