According to the relevant provisions of our country's laws, if a lawyer instigates a criminal suspect to retract his confession, and the circumstances are serious, it may constitute a criminal offense. The defender and litigation agent shall be held accountable according to law for destroying evidence and forging evidence. Evidence and criminal liability for the crime of obstructing testimony.
"Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China"
Article 44: Defenders or other personnel shall not help criminal suspects or defendants conceal, destroy, fabricate evidence or collude in confessions, and shall not threaten , induce witnesses to commit perjury or engage in other behaviors that impede the litigation activities of judicial organs.
Anyone who violates the provisions of the preceding paragraph shall be held legally responsible. If the defender is suspected of committing a crime, the case shall be handled by an investigative agency other than the investigative agency handling the case. If the defender is a lawyer, he shall promptly notify his law firm or lawyers association.
"Chinese People's Criminal Law"
Article 306: Defenders and agents ad litem destroy evidence, fabricate evidence, and obstruct testimony. In criminal proceedings, defenders . If a litigation agent destroys or falsifies evidence, helps a party to destroy or falsify evidence, threatens or induces a witness to change his or her testimony contrary to the facts or commit perjury, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention; If the circumstances are serious, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years.
If the witness testimony or other evidence provided, presented or quoted by the defender or litigation agent is inaccurate and is not deliberately forged, it does not fall into the crime of forging evidence.
The boundary between the crime of obstructing testimony and the crime of perjury
The two crimes objectively infringe upon the normal judicial litigation activities of the national judicial organs, and both may occur in the field of litigation activities, but there are still some differences between the two crimes. The obvious differences are mainly reflected in the following aspects:
(1) The subjects are different. The subject elements of the crime of obstructing testimony are general subjects; while the subject elements of the crime of perjury are limited to four special subjects: witnesses, appraisers, translators, and recorders
(2) Subjective aspects are different. The crime of obstructing testimony and the crime of perjury are both direct intentional crimes, but the specific content of the crime and the purpose of the crime are different. The former is generally for the benefit of oneself or others; the latter is to frame others or conceal evidence.
(3) Objective aspects are different. The objective aspect of the crime of obstructing testimony is to obstruct witnesses from testifying in accordance with the law or instructing others to make perjury; while the objective aspect of the crime of perjury is to make false statements about circumstances that are important to the case in criminal proceedings.
(4) The time and space of occurrence are different. Obstruction of testimony can occur before litigation or during litigation activities. It can occur in criminal litigation, civil or administrative litigation activities, and the scope of cases is wide; while perjury can only occur in In criminal proceedings, the scope of the case is narrow.