Unpacking the exclusionary rule of repeated confessions in China

While Chinese law recognises that repeated confessions following an initial confession procured by illegal means should be excluded from trial, the legal doctrine by which China excludes such evidence differs significantly from other jurisdictions. China's approach to the exclusion of repeated confessions is premised on what this paper loosely terms a ‘principle plus exceptions’ model, in which a general exclusionary rule for repeated confessions is supplemented with a closed list of exceptions. A study of the 113 cases on China Judicial Documents Network highlights the difficulties in the operationalisation of the ‘principle plus exceptions’ model, with the result that the law on repeated confessions is inconsistently applied. In response, this paper proposes that China should adopt a flexible and open-ended case-specific analysis, whereby courts examine the admissibility of the repeated confession based on the circumstances of each case and various factors. In the end, this paper advocates for essential institutional reforms aimed at bolstering the judicial authority of the Chinese judiciary and facilitating the advancement of evidence law reform in China

China · Confession (law · Doctrine · Exclusionary Rule · Political science · Sociology · Unpacking · Criminal Law and Evidence · European Criminal Justice and Data Protection · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Philosophy

• Exclusion of illegally obtained confessions in China

  Open Access•Zhiyuan Guo•The International Journal of…•2016

  Incluir item

• Is an oral-evidence based criminal trial possible in China

  Open Access•Zhuhao Wang, David R Caruso et al.•The International Journal of…•2016

  Incluir item

• The Rise and Fall of the Constitutional Exclusionary Rule in the United States

  Mark Cammack•The American Journal of…•2010

  Incluir item