But in fact, this slogan does not conform to the current legal provisions and legal concepts. According to the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a crime established by the criminal law, the punishment a person receives for committing a crime can only be adapted to the facts of the crime. It is not a criminal fact to show a frank or resistant attitude in the face of investigation and judicial investigation, and of course it does not constitute a reason for leniency or heavier punishment. Article 67 of the Criminal Law stipulates: "Whoever voluntarily surrenders himself after committing a crime and truthfully confesses his crime is self-surrender. For criminals who surrender, they can be given a lighter or mitigated punishment. " It can be seen from this provision that those who surrender themselves can only be given a lighter or mitigated punishment, which means that they cannot be given a lighter or mitigated punishment. In other words, confession does not necessarily mean leniency. According to the law and modern judicial concept, if the criminal suspect only "resists" without saying anything, and there are no other statutory aggravating or aggravating circumstances, the person who "resists" cannot be severely punished. The slogan "Be lenient in confession and strict in resistance" has its specific historical background. At that time, when the criminal law, criminal procedure law and other related basic laws were not perfect, this slogan played a positive role in cracking down on crimes, especially "counter-revolutionary crimes". At that time, the new regime was established not long ago, and there were many crimes and social security was still unstable. The policy of "being lenient in confession and being strict in resistance" is conducive to the disintegration of criminal organizations and the rapid detection and crackdown on crimes. But now, the historical background of the policy of "confessing leniency and resisting strictness" has gone away. In the contemporary society that emphasizes the rule of law, the principle of due process and respect for the legitimate rights of criminal suspects make this slogan obsolete. The modern concept of rule of law recognizes the basic human rights of all people, including criminal suspects and defendants. One of the important concepts is that "people should not be forced to testify against themselves". The United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights signed by China in 1998 also stipulates that "no one shall be forced to testify against himself". This concept is actually very simple-everyone has a psychological tendency to protect themselves, even if they commit a crime, they will unconsciously hide or resist speaking out-this is the nature of human self-protection, and the judicial organs should respect this innate human right. Speaking of this issue, we have to mention the famous "Miranda rule", whose core content means that investigators must inform suspects of their right to remain silent. Now, the "right to silence" of criminal suspects and defendants has been recognized by the laws of many countries. The essence of the right to silence is to respect people's right not to testify against themselves.