Abstract
The 2010 exclusionary rule in China and its 2012 revision has led to a spate of scholarly writings about the efficacy of the rule in the country. Divergent points have been expressed as to the viability of the rule. This paper weighs in the discussion and provides optimism for the rule’s application in China. Using a document textual analysis, the paper examines the current debate about the rule and concludes by advancing recommendations on how the rule can be better applied in the country. The authors of the paper caution against hasty decisions about the effectiveness of the law given that cultural practices and not the law itself may impede the effectiveness of the law.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Blum, B. (2008). Doctrines without borders: the “new” Israeli exclusionary rule and the dangers of legal transplantation. Stanford Law Review, 60, 2131–2171.
Campbell, C. (2011). Davis v.United States: Why the supreme court should preserve judicial integrity and prevent further erosion of the exclusionary rule. Faulkner Law Review, 2(2), 361–389.
Canon, B. (1977). Testing the effectiveness of civil liberties policies at the state and federal levels: the case of the exclusionary rule. American Politics Quarterly, 5(1), 57–82.
Chen, R. (2011). China’s new exclusionary rule: an introduction. Columbia Journal of Asian Law, 24(2), 229–246.
Davies, T. (1983). A hard look at what we know (and still need to learn) about the ‘costs’ of the exclusionary rule: the NIJ study and other studies of ‘lost’ arrests. America Bar Foundation Research Journal, 1983, 611–690.
Dickey, M. (2010). ADR gone wild: is it time for a federal mediation exclusionary rule? Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 25(3), 713–778.
Fitch, B. (2011). Rethinking ethics in law enforcement. FBI Law Bulletin, 80(10), 18–24.
Hermann, J. (2014). Chinese criminal procedure reform of 2012—how much reform did it bring? ZSTW, 126(3), 723–742.
Herzberg, F. (1987). One more time: how do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review Classic, http://synchronit.com/downloads/freebooks/herzberg.pdf. Retrieved, 25 Mar 2015.
Horowitz, D. (1977). The courts and social policy (pp. 224–225). Washington: Brookings Institution.
Legrand, P. (1997). The impossibility of legal transplants. Maastritch Journal of European and Comparative Law, 4, 111–124.
Lewis, M. (2011). Controlling abuse to maintain control: the exclusionary rule in China. New York University Journal of International law and Politics., 43(3), 1–48.
Min, C. (2014). Research on the application of the exclusionary rule. Jilin University Journal Social Sciences Edition, 54(2), 70–79.
Nolan, J. (2009). Legal accents, legal borrowing: the international problem-solving court movement. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rho, H. (2011). The exclusionary rule in China and a closer look at the dynamics of reform. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 43(3), 729–738.
Scharf, I. (2010). The exclusionary rule in immigration proceedings: where it was, where it is, where it may be going. San Diego International Law Journal, 12(1), 53–88.
Sun, C., & Wang, B. (2014). An empirical study on the implementation of the exclusionary rules of illegally obtained evidence at trial stage. Modern Law Science, 36(1), 72–83.
Time, V. (2012). Evidence gathering: the exclusionary rule in China. International Law Research, 1(1), 144–148.
Vroom, V. (n.d.). Expectancy theory of motivation. PSYCH 484: Work Attitudes and Job Motivation—Confluence. https://wikispaces.psu.edu/display/psych484/4.+expectancy+theory. Retrieved, 3/25/2015.
Wan, Y. (2011). A legal analysis of the first case of illegal evidence exclusion in China. Evidence Science, 19(6), 657–666.
Wang, C. (2013). The hidden worries and optimization reform of the nominal exclusionary rule. Law Science Magazine, 12, 100–108.
Wu, R. (2011). Strengthening judicial ethics in China—the new principles and regulations: correspondent’s report from China. Legal Ethics, 14(1), 135–137. doi:10.5235/146072811796372961.
Wu, H. (2014). The suppress of illegally obtained evidence: rule and effectiveness. Modern Law Science, 36(4), 121–130.
Wu, W., & Vander Beken, T. (2012). The evolution of criminal interrogation rules in China. International Journal of Law, Crime, and Justice, 40, 271–295.
Zalman, M. (2008). Criminal procedure: constitution and society (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson/Prentice hall.
Cases
Boyd. U.S., 116 U.S. 616 (1886)
Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 56 S.Ct. 461, 80 L.Ed.2d 682 (1936).
Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (1964).
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).
Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (1984).
Segura v. U.S., 468 U.S. 796 (1984).
U.S. v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974).
U.S. v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984).
Weeks v. U.S., 232 U.S. 383 (1914).
Wong Sun v. U.S., 371 U.S. 471 (1963)/
Hohhot, Inner Mongolia vs. Hugejiletu (1996). In Xinhua News Agency, China, Nov. 20, 2014.
Ethical Statement
Funding
This study was not funded.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Time, V.M., Dai, M. Is There Room for Optimism in China’s 2010 Exclusionary Rule and Its 2012 Revision?. Asian Criminology 11, 21–31 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-015-9216-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-015-9216-z