1. clarifies the scope of application of the pre-trial meeting. The judge may convene a pre-trial meeting under any of the following circumstances: (1) The parties, their defenders and agents ad litem apply for the exclusion of illegal evidence; (two) there are many evidence materials, and the case is significant and complicated; (three) the social impact is greater; (4) Other circumstances that require a pre-trial meeting. 2. The participants in the pre-trial meeting are defined. According to the circumstances of the case, the defendant may be notified to participate. 3. Clarify the function of pre-trial meeting. When holding a pre-trial meeting, the judge can ask questions to both the prosecution and the defense on the following issues and listen to their opinions: (1) Whether there is any objection to the jurisdiction of the case; (2) Whether to apply for withdrawal of relevant personnel; (3) Whether to apply for obtaining the evidence materials collected by public security organs and people's procuratorates in the process of investigation, examination and prosecution that are not transferred with the case to prove the defendant's innocence or light crime; (4) whether to provide new evidence; (five) whether there is any objection to the list of witnesses, experts and people with specialized knowledge; (6) Whether to apply for the exclusion of illegal evidence; (seven) whether the application is not heard in public; (8) Other issues related to the trial.
Legal objectivity:
Did the defendant attend the pre-trial meeting? According to the second paragraph of Article 182 of the Criminal Procedure Law, it is generally understood that the parties should include the defendant. However, the second paragraph of Article 183 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that related to this, people in the theoretical and practical circles also hold the same view as the judicial interpretation, and think that it is unnecessary for the defendant to attend the pre-trial meeting. The author believes that the defendant's participation in the pre-trial meeting is his litigation right and should be guaranteed. The reasons are as follows: first, the defendant's participation in the pre-trial meeting is a requirement to ensure the fairness of the proceedings. Pre-trial meeting changes the original pre-trial review procedure from a closed structure to a litigation structure integrating prosecution, defense and trial, which is called meeting, but in fact it has the nature of criminal proceedings. As an independent criminal procedure, justice is the primary value of pre-trial meeting. Procedure is the institutionalization of negotiation process, and the basic requirement of procedural justice is participation. As an indispensable role in criminal proceedings, the defendant should enjoy the right to attend pre-trial meetings. Therefore, only by absorbing the defendant to participate in the pre-trial meeting can the pre-trial meeting form an equal opportunity confrontation situation, which is also conducive to the realization of litigation justice. Second, the defendant's participation in the pre-trial meeting is an effective way to improve the efficiency of litigation. As another important value of criminal litigation activities, litigation efficiency is the direct pursuit of establishing pre-trial meeting system. The setting of pre-trial meeting requires the pursuit of the maximization of litigation efficiency on the premise of ensuring justice, that is, to solve the problems that may affect the smooth progress of the trial, and to ensure that the trial activities are not fettered and carried out with high quality and efficiency. On the one hand, the pre-trial meeting is presided over by the judge, and the progress is completely controlled by the judge. The defendant's participation will not reduce the efficiency of litigation; On the other hand, if there is no defendant's participation, the "agreement" reached at the pre-trial meeting will be meaningless if the defendant refuses to admit it during the trial, which will not only help improve the efficiency of litigation, but may also delay the litigation process. Third, the defendant's participation in the pre-trial meeting is the need to protect the litigation rights. First of all, attending the pre-trial meeting is the embodiment of the defendant's right to know in litigation. Although pre-trial meetings sometimes only solve procedural problems, procedural facts and substantive facts often go hand in hand, and the identification and solution of procedural problems is the premise of the identification and solution of substantive problems. The defendant in the defendant's position should have the right to know the evidence and the solution of the procedural problems charged with the crime. Secondly, attending the pre-trial meeting is the embodiment of the defendant's right to defense. As a witness of the facts of the case, the defendant has the most say on whether the evidence is objective and probative, whether it is extorted by torture, whether the confession is objective and true, and whether there is an interest between the judicial personnel and themselves or their close relatives, which is irreplaceable for the defender to express his defense opinions. Therefore, attending the pre-trial meeting should be an important litigation right of the defendant. Fourth, the defendant's participation in the pre-trial meeting is the need to strengthen the effectiveness of the pre-trial meeting. The unclear effect of pre-trial meeting is an important reason for the low application rate and criticism of this system. In order to clarify and strengthen the effectiveness of the pre-trial meeting, in addition to clarifying its judicial attributes, it is necessary to reshape the institutional framework to specifically clarify the scope of participants, especially stipulating that the defendant should attend the pre-trial meeting. Only by allowing the defendant to fully participate in the pre-trial meeting and express his opinions on relevant facts can the legal effect of the pre-trial meeting have a theoretical basis. Of course, the defendant has the right to attend the pre-trial meeting and the freedom to give up this right. Therefore, in the case of soliciting the opinions of the defendant, if the defendant indicates that he will not attend the pre-trial meeting, it will not affect the convening of the pre-trial meeting.