Article 33 of the 2018 Supervision Law generally stipulated that supervisory evidence can serve as a basis for the use of criminal evidence,but does not strictly distinguish between duty violations and duty crimes.Due to the procedural differences in the"connection between laws and regulations",and the conversion rules of supervisory evidence after being transferred to prosecution are different from those of investigation organs.In order to avoid litigation,the supervision evidence should still meet the basic requirements of substantive examination,and should be consistent with the evidence collection standards of investigation,review,arrest and prosecution.The substantive examination of supervisory evidence can draw les-sons from the objective obligations of prosecutors in civil law system,and the substantive examination of prosecution evidence transferred by supervision organs should form necessary judicial regulations from the aspects of evidence collection norms,evi-dence qualification and evidence exclusion.Before being transferred for examination and prosecution,the evidence of duty crime supervision should be screened by monitoring the internal case trial supervision.Focusing on the traditional rules such as the exclusion of illegal evidence,opinion evidence,hearsay evidence and reinforcing evidence,the future legislation should construct the substantive examination standard for monitoring the transformation of evidence into criminal evidence.
关键词
监察证据/刑事诉讼/证据规则/实质审查/检察官客观义务
Key words
supervisory evidence/criminal procedure/rules of evidence/substantive examination/prosecutor's objective obligation
万方数据