Analysis of the Criminal Procedure Law Civil Procedure modifications of legislative language specifi.docx

Analysis of the Criminal Procedure Law Civil Procedure modifications of legislative language specifi.docx

《Analysis of the Criminal Procedure Law Civil Procedure modifications of legislative language specifi.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Analysis of the Criminal Procedure Law Civil Procedure modifications of legislative language specifi.docx（6页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

AnalysisoftheCriminalProcedureLawCivilProceduremodificationsoflegislativelanguagespecifi

AnalysisoftheCriminalProcedureLawCivilProceduremodificationsoflegislativelanguagespecification

Abstractsappropriatelegislativelanguagetobuildareasonable,logicalstructure,andexpressionoftheappropriatelegal,andmoreconducivetotheapplicationofthelaw.CriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLawoftheabsorbedCriminalmodify,practicalexperienceandtheoreticalcivilactionsummaryforourcriminallitigation,civillitigation,actualembodiestheresultsofourcriminal,civilreform.However,modificationsoftheCriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLawinthelegislativelanguage,therearestillsomeneedtobeimproved,suchasthetheunificationofthelegislativeframework,thelogicofthelegislativelanguagesemantics,etc.Thispaperattemptstocarryouttheanalysisoftheseissues,andputforwardanumberofrecommendations.

ThePaperKeywordsCriminalProcedureLawCivilProcedurelegislativelanguage

March14,2012,thefifthsessionoftheEleventhNationalPeople’sCongressexaminedandadoptedthedecisionoftheNationalPeople’sCongressonAmendingtheCodeofCriminalProcedure,PresidentHuJintaoofthePeople’sRepublicofChinasignedthePresidentialDecreeof55,announcedthedecision,effectiveasofJanuary1,2013toAugust31.2012years,thetwenty-eighthofthe11thStandingCommitteeoftheNationalPeople’sCongressvotebythedecisionoftheStandingCommitteeoftheNationalPeople’sCongressonAmendingtheCivilProcedureLaw,since2013effectivedateofJanuarythispoint,modifythedurationofthelong,wide-rangingcomments,viewpointsdiscusstwofierceProcedureLawmodifyfinallysettled,butbasedontheCriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLawtomodifyarousedtheoscillationandEnforcementwillproducefar-reachingimpactofitsresearchamongscholarsisintheascendant.

DiscussionandaftertheimplementationoftheCriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProceduremodifiedresearchscholarsfocusmainlymodifytheguidingideology,basicprinciples,thebasicsystemandotherspecificissues,fromthepointofviewofthelegislativelanguagestudysmaller,morerepresentative<<OnChina’sCriminalProcedureLawofthelegislativelanguageperfect>><<legislativelanguageandlogicspecification-CodeofCriminalProcedurefortherawmaterials>><<<CivilProcedureLaw>improperuseofmicro-probe>>language>><<definitionofthetermsoftheCivilProcedureLaw.

Thelegislativelanguageisthelanguageusedbythelegislatorsinthelegislativeprocess,thetextaswellasthelanguageofthelawmustfollow.Legislatorslegislativeintent,legislativepurposemustbereflectedinthelegislativelanguage.Appropriatelegislativelanguagetobeabletobuildareasonablestructure,logicrigorous,appropriatelegalexpressioninappropriatelegislativelanguagewillaffectanapplicablelegalandacademicvalues,andevenleadtoambiguityandcontroversy.therefore,thelegislativequalificationstoattachimportancetothestudyofthelegislativelanguageinthelegislativework,inLegalDraftingmakingprocesstoseektheviewsoflinguists.

Accordingly,theauthorintendstocombinethebeforeandaftermodificationoftheCriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLawofthespecificlawarticle,fromtheperspectiveofnormativestructure,logic,terminologyandexpressiondosomepreliminaryexploreandsuggestamendments.

CriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLawinthesameorsimilarchaptersexistdifferentlegislativeframework,itisrecommendedthataunified

Legislativeframeworkreferstothecontentsofthelegalstructurearrangements.Legislativeframeworkisatechnicalproblem,handledwell,notonlyconducivetothesmoothintroductionofthelaw,ismoreconducivetotheunderstandingandimplementationofthelaw.

ModificationsoftheCriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLaw,oneofthetheevidencepartarethefocus.ModificationsoftheCriminalProcedureLaw,thedefinitionofallthefactsfromtheoriginal“provethetruecircumstancesoftheevidence,alltheevidence”waschangedto“materialsthatcanbeusedtoprovethefactsofthecase,areevidenceof”thekindofevidencefromtheoriginal“evidencethefollowingsevencategories:

（aphysicalevidence,documentaryevidence,（btestimonyofwitnesses,（thethreevictims’statements,（ivsuspectsconfessionoftheaccusedandtheexcuse,（fiveexpertconclusions,（frecordofinspection,（viiaudio-visualmaterials.“modify”evidenceincluding:

（aphysicalevidence（documentaryevidence,（ctestimonyofwitnesses,（dvictims’statements,（fivesuspects,theconfessionoftheaccusedandtheexcuse（sixexpertopinion,（ginquest,inspection,identification,investigativeexperimentstranscripts,（eightaudio-visualmaterials,electronicdata“aftertheCriminalProcedureLawtomodifythetypeofevidencefromsevenclassintoeightcategories,thebreakdownofthephysicalevidenceanddocumentaryevidence,anincreaseofelectronicdata.

ModificationsofCivilProcedure,thetypesofevidencefromtheoriginal“evidenceofthefollowing:

（adocumentaryevidence,（bevidence（audio-visualmaterials,（dtestimonyofwitnesses,（estatementsoftheparties,（sixexpertconclusions（viirecordsofinquests.revisedtoevidenceincludes:

（astatementoftheparties,（iidocumentaryevidence,（cphysicalevidence,（fouraudio-visualmaterials,（vElectronicData（sixwitnessestestimony,（7expertopinion,（viiisurveyinspectionrecord.CivilProceduremodifythetypesofevidencefromsevencategoriesintoeightcategories,adjusttheorderofthetypesofevidence,electronicdataandtiedwithsevenothertypesofevidence,includingphysicaldata,including

AftereditingtheCriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLawoftheelectronicdataclearlyevidenceadifferentmodifyaftertheCriminalProcedureLawistiedfortheelectronicdataandaudio-visualmaterials,modifiedaftertheCivilProcedureelectronicdataaudio-visualmaterialsinwithintiedsevenothertypesofevidenceincriminallitigation,civillitigationpracticeandtheoreticalresearch,themeaningofelectronicdata,thescopeandthemainformofnodifference,thedifferenceliesinthewaytoobtainelectronicdataasevidencereviewjudgmentstandardsandtheCriminalProcedureLawoftheoriginaldocumentaryevidence,physicalevidencetiedamendedasbreakdown,madeanagreementwiththeCivilProcedureonthedocumentaryevidence,physicalevidenceoftherelationshipbetweenprocessingTherefore,theCriminalProcedureLaw,CivilProcedureLawinthesameorsimilarchapterstherearedifferentlegislativeframework,epitomizedbytherelationshipbetweentherelationshipbetweenelectronicdataandaudio-visualmaterials,aswellaswithothertypesofevidence.

LinkstofreepapersDownloadCenter

Second,thelegislativelanguageinsemanticlogicalinconsistencies,theneedtoreviseandimprovethe

Legislativelanguageservicestothelegislativeintentofthelegislators,legislativepolicyrecordandexpressservicesaccuratelypassthelegislativeintentandlegislativepolicy.Mr.LiangQichaohaspointedout:

“Therearethreeelementstothedictionofthelaw,aYueming,secondiscorrect,thirdelasticity.cleartheuseoftheFrenchlanguage,theelasticityFrenchcontainedinthemeaningofwords.“universallawforallmembersofsociety,lawisexpressedthroughlanguageifthelanguageusedinthelegislationnotstandardized,notrigorouslogic,chaoswillinevitablyleadtotheapplicationofthelaw.

AbsorbthefruitsofChina’sprogressinhumanrights,therevisedCriminalProcedureLawwillrespectandprotectionofhumanrightsasthebasicprinciplesofourcriminalprocedurethatmustbefollowed,andbereflectedintherelevantprovisionsofArticle50.:

“Thejudges,procuratorsandinvestigatorsmustbeinaccordancewithlegalprocedures,collectingcanprovethesuspect,thedefendant’sguiltorinnocence,alltheevidenceofthegravityofhiscrime.strictlyforbiddentoextortconfessionsbytortureandtocollectevidencebythreat,enticement,deceitorotherunlawfulmethods,maynotforceanyonetoconfirmhisguiltmustbeguaranteedforallcitizensorlearningthefactsofthecaserelatingtothecase,toobjectivelyandfullyfurnishevidenceconditions,exceptinspecialcircumstances,theymaybebroughttoassistintheinvestigation.“thatonthebasisoftheoriginalcriminalprocedurallawtortureisstrictlyprohibited.plusanypersonshallbecompelledself-incrimination.additiontotheirfrankly,cannotbeenforced.theOralEvidenceforcedout,youalwayswanttoexclude.

Anypersoncannotberequiredtoprovetheirownguilt,andreflectsthespiritofhumanrights,inlinewiththespiritofChina’saccessiontotherelevantinternationalconventions.<<CivilRightsandPoliticalRightsandtheInternationalCovenanton>>theprovisionsofArticle14,paragraph3:

“Donotbeforcedtomakenotconducivetohisowntestimonyortoconfessguilt.“Inaddition,theUnitedNationsthejuvenilejusticeStandardMinimumRules>><<（<<BeijingRules>>provides:

”Theprosecutionofpeopleenjoytherighttonotbeforcedself-incrimination.

However,themodificationsaftertheCriminalProcedureLawArticle118,firstparagraph:

“investigatorsatthetimeoftheinterrogationofcriminalsuspects,shouldfirstaskwhetherthesuspectshavecommittedacrime,hisstatementtheplotofguiltorinnocence,thenhequestionssuspectsinvestigato