20 10 On May 30th, the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Justice jointly issued "Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Exclusion of Illegal Evidence in Handling Criminal Cases" (hereinafter referred to as "Provisions"), which not only clarified that verbal evidence obtained by illegal means such as extorting a confession by torture could not be used as the basis for finalizing the case, but also specified the procedures for examining and excluding illegal evidence, the burden of proof and the appearance of interrogators in court. This is an important measure for China to thoroughly implement the general plan of governing the country according to law, and it is also an important symbol of further democratization and legalization of the criminal procedure system. It is of great and far-reaching significance to punish crimes according to law, effectively protect human rights, safeguard judicial justice, especially procedural justice, and prevent the occurrence of unjust, false and wrong cases. In order to facilitate the correct understanding and application in judicial practice, the background and main contents of this provision are now explained. I. background of drafting regulations 1996, the national people's congress comprehensively revised the criminal procedure law, clearly stipulating that "extorting confessions by torture and collecting evidence by threats, enticements, deception or other illegal methods are strictly prohibited." (Article 43) However, if the investigation organ's act of obtaining evidence violates legal procedures, what consequences should it have? Is the evidence collected illegally still valid? The law does not clearly stipulate. 1998, 1999 the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate successively issued the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the Criminal Procedure Law and the Rules of Criminal Procedure of the People's Procuratorate, which established the exclusionary rules of illegal verbal evidence to a certain extent. However, due to the relative principle of content and the lack of clear and specific operating procedures, this exclusion rule still has the nature of declaration and slogan, and it is difficult to play its due legal normative role. In judicial practice, there are few cases that are identified as illegal verbal evidence according to judicial interpretation and excluded, and it is difficult to curb the phenomenon of extorting confessions by torture. Confessions obtained by illegal means, such as extorting confessions by torture, often determine the wrongs and wrongs. In order to further improve China's criminal procedure system, according to the overall arrangement of the central authorities on deepening the reform of the judicial system and working mechanism, "improving the system of excluding illegal evidence and clarifying the scope, burden of proof, review procedures and relief channels of excluding illegal evidence" is an important judicial system reform matter, which is led by the the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) Law Commission and studied with the Supreme People's Court and other departments. After full investigation, the research group of the Supreme People's Court Criminal Evidence Rules extensively solicited opinions and suggestions from all sides. On the basis of Opinions (Draft) on Several Issues Concerning the Exclusion of Illegal Verbal Evidence, the project team, together with the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Justice, formulated the Regulations. Second, the basic idea of the Provisions The basic idea of the Provisions is: with the goal of standardizing judicial behavior and promoting judicial justice, under the existing legal framework of our country, drawing on and absorbing domestic excellent research results and foreign beneficial experience, and combining with the actual work of criminal cases, formulate specific and procedural operating procedures to exclude illegal evidence, so as to avoid unjust, false and misjudged cases due to the adoption of illegal evidence. The rule of illegal evidence involves a wide range, which is unrealistic and difficult to implement under the current legal framework. To this end, the "Regulations" highlight the following three aspects: First, it highlights the exclusion of illegal evidence in ordinary criminal cases. Judging from the current situation, the rate of misjudged cases is the highest in ordinary criminal cases, but such problems have not been found in economic crimes and duty crimes. The second is to highlight the exclusion of illegal verbal evidence. Illegal evidence includes not only illegal verbal evidence, but also illegal physical evidence. The situation of illegal material evidence is complex, so it is difficult to ban it all. In practice, most misjudged cases use illegal verbal evidence. Third, it highlights the exclusion of verbal evidence obtained by illegal means such as extorting confessions by torture. Illegal verbal evidence includes evidence obtained by illegal means and evidence obtained by technical illegal means. Judging from the current unjust, false and wrong cases, it is mainly because of extorting confessions by torture. For the latter, in practice, it can generally be remedied afterwards, and there are few problems. Three. The main content of the regulations * * * stipulates a total of 15, which mainly includes two aspects: First, the substantive rules are designed to define the connotation and extension of illegal verbal evidence and stipulate the corresponding legal consequences. The second is procedural rules, which aim to solve the problems related to illegal evidence collection by bringing illegal evidence collection into the scope of procedural adjudication. On the connotation, extension and legal effect of illegal verbal evidence. Article 1 of the Regulations defines the connotation and extension of illegal verbal evidence, and the second article clarifies the legal consequences of excluding illegal verbal evidence. There is no distinction between legal and illegal evidence, and the word "illegal" is undoubtedly mainly aimed at the means of obtaining evidence. Therefore, to analyze the connotation and extension of illegal verbal evidence, we must start with defining the scope of illegal means of obtaining evidence. There are different views on this issue during the formulation of this article, and four opinions have been formed. The first view is that confessions of criminal suspects and defendants, witness testimonies and victim statements obtained by methods such as extorting confessions by torture, taking drugs and hypnosis, which cause severe physical pain, high mental pain or loss of consciousness and will, are illegal verbal evidence. The second view is that confessions, witness testimonies and victim statements of criminal suspects and defendants obtained by violence or by methods that violate the law and cause people to have high physical or mental pain or vague consciousness are illegal verbal evidence. The third opinion holds that confessions of suspects and defendants, witness testimonies and victim statements obtained by extorting confessions by torture, obtaining evidence by violence, corporal punishment and ill-treatment are illegal verbal evidence. The fourth opinion is: confessions of criminal suspects and defendants obtained by illegal means such as extorting confessions by torture, witness testimony and murder evidence obtained by illegal means such as violence and threats.

Legal objectivity:

Article 56 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that confessions of criminal suspects and defendants collected by illegal methods such as extorting confessions by torture, witness testimony and victim statements collected by illegal methods such as violence and threats shall be excluded. If the collection of material evidence and documentary evidence does not conform to legal procedures and may seriously affect judicial justice, it shall be corrected or a reasonable explanation shall be made; If it cannot be corrected or a reasonable explanation cannot be given, the evidence shall be excluded. Evidence that should be excluded during investigation, examination, prosecution and trial shall be excluded according to law and shall not be used as the basis for prosecution opinions, prosecution decisions and judgments.