The Political Heart of China’s Exclusionary Rule of Illegally Obtained Evidence: A Comparative Study with the International Criminal Court

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
Luye Mou
{"title":"The Political Heart of China’s Exclusionary Rule of Illegally Obtained Evidence: A Comparative Study with the International Criminal Court","authors":"Luye Mou","doi":"10.14330/jeail.2021.14.2.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Article 69(7) of the International Criminal Court Statute develops a specific rule to exclude evidence and thus ensure evidentiary reliability and procedural integrity before its proceedings. China has introduced the exclusionary rule of illegally obtained evidence that places an overriding priority on pursuing factual accuracy, because the rule has been devised and applied primarily for the sake of preventing miscarriages of justice and bolstering governmental integrity. A political imperative for truth makes the rule incompatible with the existing institutional environment. The ICC ’ s rule and practice illuminates the importance of neither assuming the excellence of the rule nor borrowing the rule without modification, but of exploring the rule that is based upon one ’ s own practical experience, institutional structure, and political powers. This article embraces the room for flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation that can contribute to a healthy scheme for legal transplant and law reform .","PeriodicalId":42314,"journal":{"name":"Journal of East Asia and International Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of East Asia and International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2021.14.2.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Article 69(7) of the International Criminal Court Statute develops a specific rule to exclude evidence and thus ensure evidentiary reliability and procedural integrity before its proceedings. China has introduced the exclusionary rule of illegally obtained evidence that places an overriding priority on pursuing factual accuracy, because the rule has been devised and applied primarily for the sake of preventing miscarriages of justice and bolstering governmental integrity. A political imperative for truth makes the rule incompatible with the existing institutional environment. The ICC ’ s rule and practice illuminates the importance of neither assuming the excellence of the rule nor borrowing the rule without modification, but of exploring the rule that is based upon one ’ s own practical experience, institutional structure, and political powers. This article embraces the room for flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation that can contribute to a healthy scheme for legal transplant and law reform .
中国非法证据排除规则的政治核心:与国际刑事法院的比较研究
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
8
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信