2. The current legislation and judicial interpretation are imperfect, lacking a set of operating procedures for witnesses to testify in court. The current civil legislation and judicial interpretation have no clear provisions on the operating procedures of witness testimony, the proposal of witness list, the examination of witness qualification, the notice of witness appearing in court, and the exercise of cross-examination rights. It makes it difficult for the witness to testify in court. Secondly, the rights and obligations of witnesses are not equal, and the obligations and responsibilities are out of line. China's civil procedure law stipulates the right to inform witnesses in court investigation, but it does not clearly stipulate which rights to inform; The witness has fulfilled his obligation to testify in court, but he has no right to enjoy his rights. The Civil Procedure Law stipulates that it is a citizen's legal obligation to testify in court, but the law does not stipulate what legal responsibility a person who refuses to testify in court should bear. In addition, there are selective contradictions in the legislation on witness appearing in court. The Civil Procedure Law stipulates that witnesses should testify in court. If it is really difficult to appear in court, with the permission of the people's court, written testimony may be submitted. At the same time, it is stipulated that evidence can be "presented" for cross-examination. In the reality that it is difficult for witnesses to appear in court, it will inevitably lead to the replacement of Chen Tang's testimony with written testimony and inquiry transcripts, and the replacement of cross-examination in court with evidence.
3. Judicial anomie. Mainly to crack down on perjury and perjury. At present, witness perjury and perjury occur from time to time, which seriously hinders the people's court from finding out the facts of the case, making correct judgments, and even causing unjust, false and wrong cases. In judicial practice, the court pays more attention to criminal perjury than to civil perjury, which weakens the investigation measures for witnesses to hinder civil litigation. Although some written testimony is false or perjured, most of them are not investigated because witnesses do not appear in court, which leads to witnesses often choosing written testimony to be false or perjured. Secondly, the compensation effect of the witness's appearance fee is not good. The Measures for Litigation Costs of People's Courts stipulates that the parties to a property case shall pay the fees for witnesses to appear in court to the people's court, and the witnesses who appear in court have the right to receive the above fees from the court. The Rules of Evidence in Civil Procedure also stipulates that the reasonable expenses incurred by the witness appearing in court shall be paid by the party providing the witness in advance and borne by the losing party. But in the trial practice, these provisions exist in name only. Witnesses who testify in court not only reduce their income, but also increase their expenses (transportation, accommodation, etc. ), so don't want to testify in court. Many witnesses are unwilling to testify in court because they have no compensation. In addition, the witness suffered retaliation for testifying and could not get effective judicial protection, which is also an important part of judicial anomie.