The Exclusionary Rule of Evidence Comparative Analysis and Proposals for Reform
This groundbreaking monograph asserts the need for the establishment of an exclusionary rule of evidence in China as a means of protecting the people from police wrongdoing. The author skilfully explores the foundations and developments of the exclusionary rule in the UK and USA, assessing the rule from a comparative perspective and illuminating some issues that may arise in transferring the rule from one legal system to another. Divided into two parts, the first part discusses lessons from the past, and provides an in-depth examination of the development of the exclusionary rule in the UK and USA, covering rationales, debates and the theoretical foundation of the exclusionary rule in the constitutional context. The second part looks to the future and the establishment of a Chinese exclusionary rule. Specifically, it analyses the effects of police torture, the passive attitude of judges and the need to establish such a rule in practice for future protection of human rights. The author’s experience in criminal law and procedure allow him to adroitly analyse crucial issues on both theoretical and practical level that is understandable to those working in the areas of human rights, comparative criminal procedure, and the Chinese legal system.
The Exclusionary Rule of Evidence
’Kuo-hsing Hsieh takes on the very topical issue of state torture and how to prevent it. Using the vehicle of the Exclusionary Rule, the author explores the reasons why China continues to experience continuing problems of official torture and how the Exclusionary Rule can be used to prevent it. With the United Kingdom and the United States as comparative examples, Hsieh lays out the problem and provides a solution. A most timely book.’ Robert C. Berring, Berkeley Law School, University of California, USA ’This book is an exhaustive collection of primary sources and discussions of theoretical perspectives on various aspects of exclusionary rules in the US, the UK and China, and it is an equally exhaustive collection of pertinent Chinese materials that lay out clearly and distinctly the differences between these legal systems. The author makes a heartfelt plea for change in China, and this book may be a valuable contribution to that effort.’ Ronald J. Allen, Northwestern University, USA