久久久无码人妻精品无码_6080YYY午夜理论片中无码_性无码专区_无码人妻品一区二区三区精99

US EUROPE AFRICA ASIA 中文
Opinion / Op-Ed Contributors

Debate: Criminal Procedure Law

By Wu Danhong, Zhang Benqiang and Zhang Yuzhe (China Daily) Updated: 2011-09-13 08:27

Is the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law a step forward in transparency? Three experts enlighten us with their views.

Wu Danhong

A welcome move in the right direction

The draft of the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law, released on Aug 30 to seek public opinions, has sparked an intense debate among netizens and some media outlets. Many people have said that some clauses in the draft amendment could lead to "secret arrests".

As a scholar studying Criminal Procedure Law for more than 10 years, I think such statements misinterpret the content of the draft and the intention of the legislation - which in turn could lead to absurd conclusions.

Perhaps the clause that has drawn the most attention is "the public security organ shall take a detained person into custody (and) within 24 hours notify his family or the unit to which he belongs of the reasons for the detention and the place of custody, unless it is impossible to notify or (his/her crime is related to) endangering State security or terrorism (for) such notification would hinder investigation". Some people have interpreted this to mean that the authorities "may not notify relatives of people arrested or detained in time or at all".

If we analyze the draft as it appears in the Chinese language, such interpretations are wrong. Take for example, the word "or". There are only two exceptions in the draft: one is "it is impossible to notify", the other is the "crime of endangering State security, or crime of terrorism" that may hinder an investigation.

From the perspective of the Criminal Procedure Law, the former means that one cannot be notified "objectively", and the latter means an exception in special cases. The "crime of endangering State security, or crime of terrorism", which are serious crimes related to national and public security and usually involve conspirators and accomplices that have the potential to impede an investigation if made public before certain factors are determined.

The clause, "within 24 hours after a person has been detained, his family or the unit to which he belongs shall be notified of the reasons for detention and the place of custody, except in circumstances where such notification would hinder the investigation or there is no way of notifying them", is part of the original text of Article 43 in the 1979 version of the Criminal Procedure Law, as well as Article 64 of the 1996 version, which has existed for 32 years. It can be regarded as a broad formulation in theory on making any information public about an arrested or detained person which could impede an investigation.

The new draft amendment specifies the exceptions in two specific conditions, and thereby narrows the boundaries of investigation. Irrespective of being big or small, this should be seen as a progress rather than a step backward in the transparency of laws and regulations.

The Criminal Procedure Law has existed for 32 years, and now it is on the verge of being changed in "appearance". The authorities have been working on the amendment for 15 years. We should have a pragmatic attitude toward the amendment and be mindful of the difficulties that the authorities face in their endeavor to amend the law. Misinterpretations of the clauses are not the best way to analyze an amendment.

Since the National People's Congress Standing Committee has solicited public opinions by publishing the full text of the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law, the public and the media should subject it to more serious analysis, instead of using just one point, and a wrong one at that, to misinterpret the amendment.

The author is an associate professor of law at China University of Political Science and Law. The article first appeared in People's Daily.

Zhang Benqiang

Public must be protected from ill effects

The full text of the proposed amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law, published on the website of the National People's Congress on Aug 30 to solicit public opinions, has sparked a heated public debate. The disputes, however, are focused on a few clauses such as the "crime of endangering State security, or crime of terrorism", "notifying relatives may possibly impede investigation" and "it is impossible to notify", because they can be cited as excuses not to notify relatives within 24 hours of a suspect's arrest, detention or being put under surveillance by police.

The starting point and end result of any amendment to a law should be to make it more open, fair and transparent. Besides, it should be devoted to constructing justice and safeguarding public interests. The proposed amendment fulfills these basic rules.

The draft amendment pays more attention to convenience than public opinion if we consider the clauses such as the "crime of endangering State security, or crime of terrorism", "notifying relatives may possibly impede investigation".

There is no doubt that every citizen should abide by law and has to appreciate the amendment because its aim is to ultimately benefit the public. But it's true, too, that every citizen has to be protected by law.

More importantly, it is difficult to define severe crimes such as "endangering State security", and if the authorities cannot notify the relatives of a suspect within 24 hours of his/her arrest or detention, they may not be able to convince the public of the fairness of law enforcement and conviction, especially because such cases are already common occurrences.

For example, in mid-August, a reporter of Anhui Legal Daily was detained while trying to gather information on a forced relocation operation. The "crime" he was accused of was harming social security. Besides, some weird cases of suspects going missing have been reported from some areas.

The amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law cannot cite excuses to justify "secret arrests", and that's why the public wants to know the "real reason" behind the controversial clauses. Given the current supervisory role of society, the public's rights can be undermined if the amendment is approved because it ignores citizens' right to get timely information.

The clause that says "it is impossible to notify" sounds like the authorities "do not want to notify", which can lead to a farce that the "right to interpret" is the realm of only the "law-enforcing agencies".

Police can cite the clause of "it is impossible to notify" to mislead the relatives of an arrested or detained person, and investigation departments can use it to not inform a suspect's relatives of his/her whereabouts. This will deny many a person the right to information. Moreover, law enforcement agencies can use the clause to carry out "secret arrests".

The Criminal Procedure Law, to some extent, widens the enforcement limits of the judiciary. The widening of powers and supervision are two sides of the same coin. Therefore, prevention of the abuse of rights should go hand in hand with expansion of law enforcement agencies' powers.

But the expansion of law enforcement agencies' powers can shrink public rights and, hence, the national law regime should be designed to ensure proper enforcement. But it should also be designed to protect public rights.

The public in general lacks proper legal knowledge, which means many people cannot use the law for self-protection. That's why it is important for the authorities to take special measures to protect the public from the negative effects of the law.

The article first appeared on voc.com.cn.

Zhang Yuzhe

Vague clauses have to be clarified in detail

On Aug 30, the National People's Congress released the proposed amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law to solicit public opinions.

There are three controversial clauses in the amendment which exempt police from notifying the relatives of an arrested or detained person, or after a person is put under surveillance within 24 hours: "it is impossible to notify", "crime of endangering State security, or crime of terrorism," and "notifying relatives may possibly impede investigation".

This is the biggest amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law in 15 years, and is expected to make progress on stipulations against self-incrimination to guarantee a suspect's rights. The amendment relating to power redistribution among public security organs, however, raised disputes resulting in the publication of the full text of amendment, which subsequently brought to light the controversial clauses mentioned above.

Actually, even the existing law allows police not to notify relatives of an arrested or detained suspect within 24 hours if they think doing so could impede an investigation or it is impossible to do so. Based on the original regulations, the new draft expands the scope of application to people put under surveillance and adds "the crime of endangering State security, or crime of terrorism" to other crimes.

From the perspective of legal rights, police may have reason to "not notify the relatives" of an arrested or detained suspect, but the sanctity of law demands that they be notified in time for justice to prevail. The clause, "impossible to notify", is too vague, provides too large a space for police discretion and, hence, could lead to "secret arrests", which would not only intrude on a suspect's legitimate rights and interests, but also have a serious impact on the credibility of the judiciary and the legal system.

The most famous example of such a case is the arrest of a reporter in Zhangjiakou in December 2008. Even after five days of his arrest, when the media published the case, his relatives had just got a telephone call from police to notify them that he had been arrested for taking bribe. Police didn't notify the reporter's relatives because they thought that doing so would impede the investigation. The case has since been cited as an example of "secret arrest".

The objective of the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law is not only to include the functional authority in the criminal procedure of public security organs, but also to contain the rights and obligations of people attending court hearings.

The existing Criminal Procedure Law already has loopholes like over-emphasizing entities and granting inappropriately strong powers to investigation departments, which could lead to harm the process of justice. But the new draft with vague regulations may create bigger loopholes that could further undermine human rights.

Scholar Wu Si has proposed a concept of "legal injury power" in his book, Hidden Rules. He said that once the authorities resort to legal measures by using their power which could hurt others, they might as well use it to their advantage without regard for justice. There is no justice without procedures, and once law enforcement agencies resort to "secret arrests", they would derail the process of justice.

A mature law should eliminate the vague spaces to ensure that all powers are used according to law. Thus, the new amendment should be aimed at correcting the existing errors. The exception of "not notifying relatives" should be explained in greater details and rules should be set to report to higher investigation departments for examining and approving such a move.

Once a suspect's relatives question his/her arrest, detention or surveillance, investigation departments should be obliged to "furnish proof" that their actions are justified. Only if a suspect is protected by law and placed under public supervision can society get justice.

The article first appeared on people.com.cn.

(China Daily 09/13/2011 page9)

Most Viewed Today's Top News
New type of urbanization is in the details
...
久久久无码人妻精品无码_6080YYY午夜理论片中无码_性无码专区_无码人妻品一区二区三区精99

    久久99精品久久久久久| 欧美午夜电影一区| 国产精品传媒入口麻豆| 91在线精品一区二区三区| 亚洲精品伦理在线| 欧美午夜精品一区| 麻豆精品在线播放| 国产欧美日韩精品一区| 在线一区二区三区四区| 男女激情视频一区| 中文字幕第一区| 在线观看日韩电影| 卡一卡二国产精品| 国产精品毛片无遮挡高清| 欧美在线观看视频在线| 麻豆精品在线播放| 国产精品久久久久桃色tv| 在线视频一区二区三| 久久成人麻豆午夜电影| 国产精品不卡视频| 欧美久久婷婷综合色| 国产一区二区在线观看视频| 国产精品高清亚洲| 在线观看91精品国产麻豆| 国产盗摄一区二区三区| 樱花草国产18久久久久| 日韩你懂的电影在线观看| 国产成人av一区二区三区在线| 亚洲欧洲制服丝袜| 欧美一区二区三区爱爱| 成人午夜精品在线| 性做久久久久久| 国产欧美综合在线观看第十页| 欧美综合一区二区| 国产自产高清不卡| 一区二区三区在线视频观看| 日韩色在线观看| 99久久精品免费看| 日本成人在线看| 中文字幕视频一区二区三区久| 欧美日韩一区二区三区不卡| 成人一道本在线| 日本欧洲一区二区| 中文字幕在线视频一区| 日韩午夜在线影院| 99热这里都是精品| 久久99久久99小草精品免视看| 亚洲丝袜自拍清纯另类| 日韩欧美国产午夜精品| 91蝌蚪国产九色| 激情深爱一区二区| 亚洲线精品一区二区三区八戒| 久久久精品免费观看| 欧美区一区二区三区| 成人美女视频在线看| 日本亚洲一区二区| 亚洲免费在线视频一区 二区| 久久亚洲私人国产精品va媚药| 欧美色视频在线观看| 成人18精品视频| 黄色精品一二区| 亚洲成人av福利| 日韩毛片在线免费观看| 久久久久久久综合| 4438x亚洲最大成人网| 99精品一区二区三区| 国产一区二区影院| 日本免费在线视频不卡一不卡二| 亚洲精品综合在线| 国产欧美精品一区二区色综合 | 成人手机电影网| 久久国产尿小便嘘嘘尿| 亚洲国产精品视频| 亚洲精品菠萝久久久久久久| 中文字幕乱码久久午夜不卡| 26uuu国产日韩综合| 欧美一区二区三区男人的天堂| 欧美亚洲国产一区二区三区va| 9i在线看片成人免费| 国产精品中文欧美| 久久99国产精品尤物| 日本 国产 欧美色综合| 日韩精品成人一区二区三区| 亚洲一区中文在线| 亚洲欧美日韩电影| 亚洲人成精品久久久久久| 国产精品伦一区二区三级视频| 久久久久久久网| 久久日韩精品一区二区五区| 欧美tickling网站挠脚心| 日韩欧美一区在线| 欧美一区二区高清| 欧美一区二区三级| 日韩欧美在线网站| 日韩久久久久久| 在线观看91av| 欧美一级免费大片| 日韩午夜三级在线| 日韩一区二区中文字幕| 日韩女优电影在线观看| 精品欧美一区二区在线观看| 精品久久久久久亚洲综合网| 精品国一区二区三区| 久久综合中文字幕| 久久精品免费在线观看| 国产日产欧美精品一区二区三区| 久久久99精品免费观看不卡| 久久九九全国免费| 日本一区二区三区久久久久久久久不 | 中文一区在线播放| 国产日韩欧美一区二区三区乱码| 国产清纯美女被跳蛋高潮一区二区久久w| 久久奇米777| 国产女同性恋一区二区| 国产免费久久精品| 中文字幕在线观看不卡| 亚洲另类中文字| 性做久久久久久免费观看| 免费观看日韩电影| 国产精品一区一区三区| 成人美女视频在线观看18| 91在线精品一区二区三区| 欧美天堂亚洲电影院在线播放| 欧美男人的天堂一二区| 97久久精品人人爽人人爽蜜臀 | 精品捆绑美女sm三区| 日韩一级大片在线| 精品美女在线观看| 日韩欧美中文一区二区| 久久久国产精品不卡| 国产精品美女久久久久久久久久久| 国产精品网站导航| 亚洲六月丁香色婷婷综合久久| 午夜日韩在线电影| 国内国产精品久久| 不卡一区二区三区四区| 欧美性一级生活| 欧美一区二区三区四区高清| 久久久久久久久久久电影| 国产精品九色蝌蚪自拍| 亚洲一级不卡视频| 免费人成精品欧美精品| 国产成人一区二区精品非洲| 91蝌蚪porny| 91精品国产综合久久久蜜臀图片| 精品久久国产97色综合| 国产精品久久久久久久久晋中| 亚洲欧美日韩一区| 麻豆91免费观看| 99精品一区二区| 日韩一区二区三区免费看 | 一区二区三区产品免费精品久久75| 日韩精品一二三区| 国产精品一二三四区| 色综合色综合色综合| 91精品蜜臀在线一区尤物| 国产欧美日韩视频一区二区| 亚洲午夜国产一区99re久久| 国内外成人在线视频| 色域天天综合网| 日韩欧美高清dvd碟片| 国产精品久久久久三级| 日韩电影免费一区| 成人激情午夜影院| 欧美一区二区在线不卡| 国产精品久久久久久久久图文区| 日韩高清欧美激情| 成人免费看的视频| 欧美精选一区二区| 中文字幕va一区二区三区| 丝袜诱惑亚洲看片| 成人a免费在线看| 日韩欧美一级在线播放| 一区二区三区中文在线| 国产一区 二区| 欧美日韩国产a| 国产精品国产三级国产三级人妇 | 精品国产一区二区三区久久久蜜月 | 国产色产综合产在线视频| 欧美肥大bbwbbw高潮| 国产网站一区二区三区| 亚洲福利一二三区| 国产成人亚洲综合色影视| 911精品产国品一二三产区| 亚洲欧美在线高清| 国产一区二区在线免费观看| 欧美精品视频www在线观看| 中文字幕在线不卡视频| 精彩视频一区二区三区| 色天使色偷偷av一区二区| 国产色产综合产在线视频| 日本欧美一区二区| 91成人国产精品| 国产精品国产自产拍在线| 久久福利资源站| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区在线播放| 1区2区3区欧美| 国产成人精品网址| 精品久久人人做人人爰| 日韩福利电影在线|