1. Cases
Intermediate People's Court of City B in Province A.
Administrative rulings.
Appellant Li XX appealed to this court against the administrative judgment of the People's Court of District C of District B of Province A against the appellee B Municipal Public Security Bureau Branch D Police Station (hereinafter referred to as D Police Station) for the administrative punishment of public security administration. After the case was filed and accepted, this court formed a collegial panel to conduct a trial in accordance with law.
Appellant Li Moumou appealed, claiming that there were 3 records of the identification of the scene involved in the case, in which he was identified as not himself. During the first-instance trial, he also raised the issue of the falsity of the identification record. At the scene of the identification, he clearly explained to the police handling the case that he had not gone to the room on the second floor and had not had sex with a third person, and refused to identify the scene on the spot. The on-site identification ** attached to the file is that the police handling the case at the police station used someone else's ** as their own identification in order to achieve a complete chain of evidence for administrative punishment, and then induced him to sign the record. The above-mentioned obviously false interrogation records, inspection records, and identification records were all made by the case-handling police in order to induce them to admit their acts, and the court of first instance avoided the falsity and contradiction of the above-mentioned evidence, which violated the basic principle of administrative litigation to review the legality and legitimacy of administrative acts of administrative organs.
This court holds that the people's court hearing an administrative case shall conduct a comprehensive review of the administrative act being sued. There is an error in the identification record contained in the evidence submitted by the police station D to prove the legality of the administrative act of its unit, and the evidence is one of the evidence that the police station D determined that Li XX carried out ** act and made an administrative punishment decision, and the court of first instance did not ascertain the relevant facts, that is, it found that the evidence of the "Administrative Punishment Decision" made by the D police station against Li XX was conclusive and did not comply with the law. In accordance with the provisions of Article 89, Paragraph 1 (3) of the "Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China", the ruling is as follows:
1. Revoke the administrative judgment of the people's court of District C of Province B, City A;
2. Remand to the People's Court of District C of City B of Province A for retrial.
2. Relevant provisions
Administrative Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China
Article 40: Where citizens, legal persons, or other organizations violate the order of administrative management and shall be given administrative punishments in accordance with law, the administrative organs must ascertain the facts; Where the facts of the violation are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, administrative punishments must not be given.
Provisions on the Procedures for the Handling of Administrative Cases by Public Security Organs
Article 101: In order to ascertain the facts of the case, the people's police handling the case may allow suspects, victims, or other witnesses to identify items, venues, or suspects related to the illegal conduct.
Article 106: An identification record shall be drafted for the process and results of the identification, and the people's police handling the case and the person making the identification are to sign or leave a fingerprint. When necessary, an audio or video recording shall be made of the identification process.
3. There are errors in the identification record, the specific location of ** cannot be determined, ** the facts of the administrative punishment are unclear, and the evidence is insufficient
On the basis of the above provisions, the people's police may organize the suspect to conduct an identification at the scene, and make an identification record of the process and results of the identification. The identification record must conform to the objective and true circumstances and be consistent with the actual identification situation. Identification of the scene record and ** is one of the important evidence of the case, if there is no such evidence, the facts may be unclear and the evidence is insufficient.
In this case, according to the appellant, he did not identify the scene at all, and the identification of the scene ** was an application of another person**. The court of second instance also held that the identification record was erroneous, and that the identification record was an important part of the administrative punishment evidence. Due to an error in the identification record, the court of second instance revoked the first-instance judgment and remanded for a new trial.
About the Author:
Lawyer Guo Xiaohang
Position: Director and Senior Partner of the Criminal Defense Center of Chongqing Jinmu Jinyang Law Firm.
Education experience: Bachelor of Laws from Southwest University, Master of Investigation from Chinese People's Public Security University.
Work experience: More than 10 years of experience in handling and reviewing criminal, public security and traffic cases in public security organs.
Areas of expertise: Criminal DefenseDrunk driving defense, pornography, gambling and drug security punishment, temporary seizure and revocation of driver's license, administrative reconsideration of traffic penalties, and administrative litigation.