ChnStd  Vol.3 No.3 , August 2014
China’s Forensic System: Critical Comments on the “Latest” Flaw
Author(s) Jiang Na
ABSTRACT
The article will critically examine the fundamental flaws that have been newly discovered from the “latest” case studies. In recent decades, numerous miscarriages of justice have occurred in China mainly due to the insufficient or improper use of forensic evidence. Comments on the “latest” flaw will start from an overview of the notorious wrongful conviction in Case ZHANG Gaoping and ZHANG Hui whose exonerations in 2013 were based on the proper use of forensic techniques such as DNA testing. The case highlights the injustice that results when forensic evidence is ignored in favour of wrongful confessions extorted under police torture. It has been suggested that China’s several waves of forensic science reform cannot lead the current forensic identification to objective, fair or reliable forensic evidence. The “latest” founded flaw entrenched in its forensic system failed to be solved by technical, financial, administrative or legal progress only. In essence, the 2005 reform on forensic identification is flawed to its core, albeit being recently identified. This is primarily because in law forensic experts inside police can conduct identification to provide forensic evidence on cases investigated by police, which cannot ensure necessary check or balance to prevent or reduce forensic errors in practice.

Cite this paper
Jiang Na (2014) China’s Forensic System: Critical Comments on the “Latest” Flaw. Chinese Studies, 3, 96-99. doi: 10.4236/chnstd.2014.33013.
References
[1]   Boehler, P. (2013). Supreme People’s Court Judge Urges End to Wrongful Convictions. South China Morning Post. http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1232279/supreme-peoples-court-judge-urges-end-wrongful-convictions

[2]   Guo Hua (2012). Research on Several Legal Issues of Judicial Psychiatric Identification. Faxuejia, 2, 121-136. http://law.cssn.cn/fx/fx_sfjdx/201310/t20131029_739887.shtml

[3]   He Jiahong, & He Ran (2012). Empirical Studies of Wrongful Convictions in Mainland China. The University of Cincinnati Law Review, 80, 1277-1292. http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/uclr/vol80/iss4/11

[4]   Li Xinran (2013). Sorry’ Is Not Enough for Wrongful Convictions. Shanghai Daily.
http://www.shanghaidaily.com/Opinion/chinese-perspectives/Sorry-is-not-enough-for-wrongful-convictions/shdaily.shtml

[5]   Pearson, G. (2011). Policing Serious Crime in China: From “Strike Hard” to “Kill Fewer” By Susan Trevaskes. British Journal of Criminology, 52, 230-233.

[6]   Shen Xinwang, & Wang Quanbao (2013). ISSUU—July 2013 by China Newsweek Corporation.
http://issuu.com/newschinamag/docs/july13

[7]   Teng Biao (2011). Blood, Justice and Corruption: Why the Chinese Love Their Death Penalty. http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2075010,00.html

[8]   Trevaskes, S. (2006). Severe and Swift Justice in China. British Journal of Criminology, 47, 23-41.

[9]   Wong, K. C. (2011). Police Reform in China (p. 300). CRC Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/b11378

[10]   Xu, Jinghe (2005). Deepening Reform on Judicial Identification, Realizing Several Transitions and Ensuing Judicial Justice. http://www.legalinfo.gov.cn/moj/zgsfjd/2005-10/25/content_220040.htm

 
 
Top