On the Sufficiency Connotation of Evidence Identification in Procedural Law

The standard of criminal proof refers to the degree to which the defendant is proved guilty by using evidence according to law. China's criminal evidence system adopts the proof standard of "clear criminal facts and sufficient evidence". Although China's criminal procedure law clearly stipulates this, there are different understandings and opinions in judicial theory and practice on how to determine the "true and sufficient" conditions of criminal evidence in different litigation links. This paper will discuss the conditions of sufficient evidence through the criminal evidence proof standards in different links of criminal proceedings. Keywords: standard of proof of criminal evidence, China's criminal procedure law stipulates that the standard of proof of criminal cases is whether the evidence is "true and sufficient". Whether in the investigation stage, the public prosecution stage or the trial stage, we must adhere to the objective standard of "truthfulness and sufficiency" of evidence. Accurately speaking, the condition of "truthfulness and sufficiency" of evidence is relative to the proof requirements at a specific stage, from filing, investigation, prosecution to trial. First, the true and sufficient meaning of criminal evidence The meaning of "true and sufficient" evidence in the Criminal Procedure Law includes the requirements of "quality" and "quantity". "Indeed" is a requirement for the quality of evidence, that is, evidence has objective basic facts and proof function, and it is required that each piece of evidence must have objective connection with the criminal facts to be verified, have probative force and be able to prove the facts to be proved. "Adequacy" is the requirement of the amount of evidence, that is, the amount of evidence needs to meet the requirements of proving the facts of the crime. The amount here does not refer to the amount of evidence, but to the size or strength of the probative force of evidence, and the evidence collected and adopted should form an evidence chain. As long as the evidence constitutes a sufficient reason to determine the facts of the case, no matter how much, it can be considered sufficient. The "certainty" and "sufficiency" of evidence complement each other. "Indeed" is the premise of "sufficiency". Only conclusive evidence can be applied to the investigation, prosecution and trial of a case, and the objective truth of the case can be proved. "Sufficiency" is the solid foundation of "certainty". Only the evidence is true. If the standard of sufficient evidence cannot be met, the case cannot be finalized. Only when the real evidence forms a chain of evidence and reaches sufficient probative force can the objective facts be reproduced. Only by examining the evidence from the dual perspective of "certainty and sufficiency" is the scientific judgment standard. In judicial practice, in the three links of investigation, prosecution and judgment, the conditions of "authenticity and sufficiency" of evidence should be strictly judged in order to reach the final standard. Secondly, it analyzes the reasons for the different standards of proof in all aspects of criminal proceedings. China's public security organs, procuratorial organs and legal organs are responsible for cracking down on and punishing crimes, protecting innocent people from legal investigation, and protecting citizens' personal rights, property rights, democratic rights and other rights. Therefore, in the process of handling criminal cases, the basic requirements for proof are the same, that is, when the case is finalized, the facts of the case are clear and the evidence is indeed sufficient. However, China's criminal procedure law does not clearly stipulate the truthfulness and sufficiency of three-stage evidence. In judicial practice, the requirements for the "authenticity and sufficiency" of evidence in investigation, prosecution and trial are also progressive. The main reasons are: First, the functional requirements are different. Article 3 of China's Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that the public security organs shall be responsible for the investigation, detention, execution and pre-trial of criminal cases. The people's procuratorate shall be responsible for the prosecution, approval of arrest, investigation and prosecution of cases directly accepted by procuratorial organs. The people's court is responsible for the trial. It can be seen that the responsibilities of the self-investigation departments of public security organs and procuratorial organs are mainly reflected in the detection of cases, the main work of procuratorial organs is reflected in the supervision and review of cases, and the work of judicial organs is reflected in making judgments through the judgment of evidence. Different functions directly lead to different requirements for criminal evidence standards; Second, the statutory time limit for litigation directly determines the requirements of "truthfulness and sufficiency" of evidence in different litigation links. In order not to violate the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, it is necessary to let the case enter the next stage of litigation within the litigation period, instead of waiting for all the evidence to be collected accurately and fully before entering the next stage. If the criminal suspect commits robbery and causes personal injury to the victim, and the victim's injury is difficult to recover in a short time, which affects the identification of the injury. In this case, it is impossible to wait until the victim's injury recovers before filing an arrest or transfer lawsuit. Therefore, the limitations of criminal proceedings also lead to different evidence standards in investigation and prosecution of some cases. Third, there are differences in the professional quality of case handlers. The handling of criminal cases goes through three stages: investigation, prosecution and trial, and is handled by different undertakers. Therefore, the professional quality, law enforcement ability and handling experience of the case-handling personnel directly affect the collection of evidence in this case and the "true and full" understanding. It is obviously not feasible to force different investigators to reach the "same" standard of evidence collection and proof in different links of the same case. Fourth, the dynamic changes of the case. Criminal cases have their own characteristics, but more are different. In particular, the gradual development of individual cases sometimes does not depend on human will. When the evidence in the early litigation stage of individual cases enters the later litigation stage, the probative force and evidential ability of the evidence taken will often change because of the change of the case. Therefore, the standard of "one size fits all" [1] cannot require the standard of proof in all litigation links. In my opinion, all aspects of criminal proceedings should determine the standard of proof to be achieved when collecting evidence according to the requirements and purposes of the current proceedings. Through different links, gradually improve the standard of proof of evidence, and finally make the facts of the case clear and the evidence really sufficient when finalizing the case. Third, the proof standard of "truthfulness and sufficiency" of evidence in all aspects of criminal proceedings. Article 160 of China's new criminal procedure law [2] stipulates that the public security organs should ensure that the criminal facts are clear and the evidence is indeed sufficient when investigating the closed case; Article 172 stipulates that if the people's procuratorate believes that the criminal facts of the criminal suspect have been ascertained and the evidence is indeed sufficient, criminal responsibility should be investigated according to law, it shall make a decision to prosecute; Article 195 stipulates that if the facts of the case are clear and the evidence is really sufficient, and the defendant is found guilty according to law, the people's court shall make a guilty verdict. It can be seen that the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates the general proof requirements for transfer of prosecution, public prosecution and guilty verdict. The Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Procuratorate stipulates the standard of proof of arrest, transfer for prosecution and public prosecution, and the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates the standard of proof of guilty verdict. These provisions embody different standards of evidence in all aspects of criminal proceedings. Specifically, it can be reflected in the following aspects: (1) the standard of evidence proof in the investigation stage. Article 1 10 of China's new Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that the people's court, the people's procuratorate or the public security organ shall, according to their jurisdiction, timely review the materials of accusation, complaint, report and surrender, and if they think that there are criminal facts that need to be investigated for criminal responsibility, they shall file a case. Article 1 13 stipulates: public security organs shall investigate criminal cases that have been filed, and collect and obtain evidence of criminal suspects' guilt or innocence, light or heavy crimes. A flagrante delicto or a major criminal suspect may be detained according to law, and a criminal suspect who meets the conditions for arrest shall be arrested. Article 80 stipulates that the public security organ may detain a flagrante delicto or a major suspect under any of the following circumstances: (1) a person who is preparing to commit a crime, commits a crime or is found immediately after committing a crime; (2) The victim or a person who saw him at the scene identified him as a criminal; (3) criminal evidence is found around him or at his residence; (four) attempted suicide, escape or escape after committing a crime; (5) It is possible to destroy or forge evidence or collude with others; (six) do not speak the real name and address, the identity is unknown; (7) Being seriously suspected of committing crimes on the run, committing crimes for many times or committing crimes in association. Through the above provisions, it can be explained that the standards of evidence proof in the investigation stage are: first, the criminal facts have occurred; Second, the criminal suspect has a major criminal suspicion; Third, there is evidence or reason to believe that there is a connection between criminal suspects and criminal facts. Fourth, the criminal facts that need to be investigated for criminal responsibility. With the above conditions, you can file a case and detain the suspect. (ii) Review the evidentiary standards in the process of arrest. Article 86 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Procuratorate stipulates that the people's procuratorate shall approve or decide to arrest a criminal suspect who is proved to have criminal facts and may be sentenced to more than fixed-term imprisonment, but it is not enough to prevent social danger. There is evidence to prove that there is a criminal fact "means that the following circumstances are met at the same time: (1) there is evidence to prove that a criminal fact has occurred; (2) There is evidence to prove that the criminal facts were committed by the criminal suspect; (3) The evidence proving that the criminal suspect has committed a criminal act has been verified. "Criminal fact" can be a single criminal fact or any of several criminal acts. It can be clearly seen from the above provisions that the standard of proof in the process of examination and arrest is higher than that in the investigation stage. Mainly reflected in the following aspects: first, there must be evidence to prove that a criminal fact has occurred. This fact can be one of several criminal acts of the criminal suspect or a single criminal fact, but it must be verified. Obviously, the conditions for public security organs to detain criminal suspects are far from meeting the requirements of arrest; Second, the fact of the crime is what the criminal suspect did. This shows that when there is evidence to prove that a criminal act occurred and the criminal suspect committed it, there must be evidence to prove that the criminal act was committed by the criminal suspect, forming a chain of evidence to prove that the criminal suspect committed a verified criminal act; [3] Thirdly, the requirements of "quality" and "quantity" of evidence are put forward. The third condition of arrest clearly puts forward the requirement of "three characteristics" of evidence, which ensures the seriousness of arrest measures, that is, only when the conclusions drawn from "true and sufficient" evidence are consistent and the criminal suspect is confirmed to have committed a criminal act stipulated in the criminal law can the conditions of arrest be met. Fourth, the conditions of arrest do not require finding out all the criminal facts of the suspect. As long as there is evidence to prove that the suspect has committed a crime, compulsory measures can be taken to arrest the suspect. Through investigation and examination of arrest, it can be seen that "suspected crime" is the evidence standard of investigation, while "constitution of crime" is the evidence standard of examination and arrest. (III) Standards of evidence in the process of examination and prosecution Article 168 of the new Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that when examining a case, the people's procuratorate must find out: (1) whether the facts and circumstances of the crime are clear, whether the evidence is true and sufficient, and whether the nature and charges of the crime are correctly identified; (two) whether there are any omission crimes and other persons who should be investigated for criminal responsibility; (3) Whether criminal responsibility should be investigated; (4) Whether there are incidental civil actions; (5) Whether the investigation activity is legal. Article 250 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Procuratorate stipulates that the people's procuratorate must find out: (1) whether the identity of the criminal suspect is clear, including name, gender, nationality, date of birth, occupation and unit; (two) whether the facts and circumstances of the crime are clear, and whether the opinions on the nature and charges of the crime are correct; There are circumstances that cannot be determined to be heavier, lighter, mitigated or exempted from punishment; * * * Determine whether the responsibility of the criminal suspect in the same criminal case in criminal activities is appropriate; (three) whether the evidence materials are transferred with the case, and whether the list, copies, photos or other supporting documents of the evidence that are not suitable for transfer are transferred with the case; (4) Whether the evidence is true and sufficient; (five) whether there are any omission crimes and other persons who should be investigated for criminal responsibility; (six) whether it belongs to criminal responsibility; (seven) whether there is an incidental civil action; Whether it is necessary for the people's procuratorate to file an incidental civil action if the state property or collective property suffers losses; (eight) whether the compulsory measures taken are appropriate; (9) Whether the investigation activities are legal; (ten) whether the property related to the crime and its fruits have been sealed up, frozen and properly kept for verification. Whether the return of the legal property of the victim and the handling of contraband or articles unsuitable for long-term preservation are appropriate, and whether the transfer documents are complete. This provision clarifies the standard of proof of criminal evidence in the process of examination and prosecution. Compared with the process of investigation and arrest, it requires not only sufficient evidence of "conviction", but also sufficient evidence of criminal procedure supervision and "sentencing". Mainly reflected in: First, we should fully verify the identity of the suspect. As long as there is evidence to prove that the suspect has committed a criminal act, there is no requirement for the basic situation of the suspect, but there are clear requirements for the identification of the suspect in the review and prosecution. Second, the facts and circumstances of the crime should be fully verified. In the process of examining and arresting, as long as there is evidence to prove that the suspect has committed a crime, he can be arrested, which is the "conviction" standard. However, in the process of examination and prosecution, it is necessary to collect all the evidence of the criminal suspect's criminal behavior in an all-round way, and at the same time collect the evidence of his minor crime, serious crime, guilt and innocence. Through the collection and review of these evidences, it is concluded that the criminal behavior, the nature of the crime and the circumstances that the criminal suspect cannot be given a lighter or mitigated punishment are the same. That is, comprehensively collect evidence of "conviction and sentencing". Third, highlight the function of legal supervision. By reviewing relevant evidence materials, it is determined whether the compulsory measures taken by the criminal suspect are appropriate, whether the investigation activities are legal, whether the case materials are transferred, and whether the items involved are properly handled. This not only ensures the "legitimacy" of evidence, but also strengthens the supervision of investigation activities. Therefore, the standard of evidence required for examination and prosecution has not only reflected the function of "punishing crimes", but has risen to the procuratorial function of "strengthening legal supervision and safeguarding fairness and justice". (IV) Standard of evidence in the trial: Article 52 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates that the facts of the case that need to be proved by evidence include: (1) the identity of the defendant; (2) Whether the alleged criminal act exists; (3) Whether the alleged behavior was carried out by the defendant; (4) The defendant is innocent, and the motive and purpose of his actions; (five) the time, place, means and consequences of the act; (6) The responsibilities of the defendant and the relationship with other co-defendants; (seven) whether the defendant's behavior constitutes a crime, and there are circumstances that cannot be determined or decided to be heavier, lighter, mitigated or exempted from punishment; (8) Other facts related to conviction and sentencing. This provision determines the standard of evidence for the people's courts to try criminal cases. This standard includes the evidence requirements of "conviction" and "sentencing" in criminal cases. Compared with the examination and prosecution, the evidence requirements of "conviction" and "sentencing" are the same. Compared with the review and prosecution, the difference between them is reflected in three points: first, the "three characteristics" of evidence are reviewed in the trial, and then whether it is used as evidence for conviction and sentencing is determined. In addition to examining the "three natures" of evidence, the prosecution section also needs to supervise the investigation activities. It shows that the court only exercises judicial power independently, while the procuratorial organ exercises legal supervision power in addition to accusing crimes; Second, in the trial stage, the court only examines whether the criminal facts accused by the public security organs are clear, whether the evidence is true and sufficient, and whether there is evidence of sentencing. In the stage of examination and prosecution, in addition to examining the crimes committed by criminal suspects, it is also necessary to find out whether the criminal suspects have omitted crimes, whether they have omitted criminal suspects and other facts; Third, in the trial stage, the court examines the evidence provided by the public prosecution agency, and also examines the evidence provided by the criminal suspect and lawyer to eliminate reasonable doubt and determine whether the criminal suspect is guilty or innocent, while the public prosecution agency only provides evidence for the criminal facts it accuses. Although different litigation links have different standards of criminal proof, they have a common purpose, that is, to restore the objective truth of the case and punish the crime by collecting evidence. Therefore, grasping the "true and sufficient" conditions of evidence in all litigation links is conducive to ensuring accurate and timely investigation of criminal facts, correct application of laws, punishment of criminals and protection of innocent people from criminal investigation. Four, grasp the "true and sufficient" conditions of evidence in the review and prosecution. The legal supervision function of procuratorial organs over criminal proceedings determines that the requirement of "truthfulness and sufficiency" of evidence is the highest in the process of examination and prosecution. This high standard requirement not only ensures the accurate attack on crime, but also ensures the exercise of legal litigation supervision function, which embodies the basic functions and functions of procuratorial organs in China. Therefore, in the process of examination and prosecution, we should accurately grasp the "true and sufficient" evidence conditions. (1) The "three natures" of evidence in criminal cases are the "soul" of criminal cases. Evidence is the basis of criminal proceedings. Without evidence, the whole criminal procedure cannot be carried out. The "legality, objectivity and relevance" of evidence determines whether the evidence has probative force and evidential ability, which is the basic feature of evidence. The legality of evidence means that litigation evidence must be factual materials obtained in accordance with legal requirements and legal procedures. The legality of evidence ensures that the provision, collection and examination of evidence conform to the procedural provisions of the law, and formally ensures that the evidence materials used to prove the facts of the case conform to the legal requirements. The objectivity of evidence means that litigation evidence is an objective fact, not something that people speculate and are false. The objectivity of evidence provides a material basis for judicial personnel to investigate and collect evidence, find out and prove the truth of the case. The relevance of evidence refers to the objective connection between litigation evidence and the facts to be proved in the case, which is the basis for the formation of evidence chain between evidence. If the evidence for ascertaining the facts of a crime does not meet the above three conditions, the facts of a crime cannot be ascertained. Therefore, strictly examining the "three natures" of evidence is the basis, the "soul" and the perfect combination of substantive justice and procedural justice to ensure the accurate handling of criminal cases. (2) The purpose of paying equal attention to "conviction" evidence and "sentencing" evidence is not only to punish crimes, but also to educate and prevent crimes. Therefore, sentencing should be based on the criminal facts, criminal nature, circumstances and the degree of harm to society. Therefore, in the process of examination and prosecution, it is necessary to comprehensively collect the evidence of the criminal suspect's minor crime, serious crime, guilt and innocence, ensure that he will be punished according to his crime and crime in the trial, realize the purpose of punishment, education and crime prevention, and realize the unity of legal effect, social effect and political effect. The author believes that sentencing evidence should be collected from the following three aspects. First, collect evidence that affects sentencing, such as the amount of crimes committed by criminal suspects, the number of crimes, the consequences of crimes, etc. Second, collect evidence of criminal suspects' statutory sentencing. It mainly includes excessive defense, excessive risk aversion, crime preparation, attempted crime, crime suspension, juvenile crime, elderly crime, mental patient crime with limited capacity, deaf-mute or blind crime, and evidence of sentencing circumstances such as accomplice, coerced accomplice, instigator, surrender, meritorious service and recidivism. Third, collect the criminal suspect's cognitive ability, personal growth experience, education level, consistent performance, repentance performance, motivation and purpose of committing the crime, age at the time of committing the crime, whether he is a first-time offender, an occasional offender, whether he has a criminal record and other relevant sentencing evidence. Fourth, collect sentencing evidence such as whether the suspect has returned stolen goods, returned compensation, obtained the understanding of the victim, and whether the victim was at fault in the crime. Fifth, collect evidence that can affect the sentencing of criminal suspects, such as the victim's individual and family. By collecting the above sentencing evidence, we can realize the balance of sentencing, better safeguard judicial justice and ensure the realization of the penalty task. (3) Pay equal attention to the accusation of crime and the supervision of criminal proceedings, and review the prosecution link. It is necessary not only to examine the criminal facts of criminal suspects, but also to find out whether there are omissions in criminal facts and other relevant facts that should be investigated for criminal responsibility, whether the investigation activities are legal, and whether the property involved is improperly handled. When handling a case, it is also necessary to put forward procuratorial opinions on all the contents of the review. Therefore, the evidence collection in this link is not limited to the evidence accusing the criminal suspect of committing a crime, but also other evidence materials for reviewing the contents of the prosecution, with special emphasis on collecting relevant evidence on whether the investigation activities are legal. The collection of evidence related to the supervision and investigation activities must reflect the supervision of procuratorial organs on the public security organs' filing of cases, taking compulsory measures, whether the investigation activities conform to the handling procedures, the time limit for litigation and whether there are other illegal acts. Therefore, in the process of examination and prosecution, the contents of legal supervision and evidence of suspected crimes must be collected equally on the condition that the evidence is "true and sufficient". Evidence is the basis of judicial justice and the only means to prove the facts of a crime. We should treat evidence with a scientific attitude, respect objective facts and truthfully reflect them. In the process of collecting and using evidence, once mistakes are found, they should be corrected realistically, so that the evidence on which the case is based is legal, the evidence can prove the facts of the case and the circumstances of sentencing and conviction, the evidence is not contradictory to the facts of the case, and the conclusions drawn from all the evidence are consistent. Only by collecting evidence comprehensively and fully can the procuratorial power of procuratorial organs be fully and effectively exercised. "The facts of the crime are clear, and the evidence is true and sufficient" is the standard of proof in China's criminal proceedings, and it is also the requirement that the matters to be proved to prove the facts of the case must meet. Only by accurately grasping the evidence standards in all aspects of criminal proceedings can we urge criminal suspects and defendants to plead guilty to the law, protect innocent people from criminal investigation, educate citizens to consciously abide by the law, actively fight criminals, safeguard the socialist legal system, respect and protect human rights, protect citizens' personal rights, property rights, democratic rights and other rights, and ensure the smooth progress of socialist construction.