论中国民事诉讼文书提出义务制度之完善

Abstract

The obligation of presenting documents refers to the public law obligation of the holder of documents to give orders according to the documents, and to present the specific documents held by him to assist the other party in giving evidence and the court in finding out the case. Recently, with the increasing complexity of modern new litigation, due to the gap between economic ability and social status, there is a large amount of biased evidence in practice, that is, most or key evidence is in the hands of one party, which leads to unfair trial. However, the application of the obligation put forward in the document improves the ability of the parties to collect evidence, which is of profound significance for shaping equal confrontation between the parties, solving the phenomenon of biased evidence and realizing the true concept of equality of arms. Obviously, the obligation system of presenting documents is an indispensable part of solving evidence disputes in civil proceedings. The new Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Civil Litigation Evidence, published on December 15th, 2019 and officially implemented on May 1st, 2020, has improved the application procedures of the obligation of presenting documents that are not yet clear in the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of People's Republic of China (PRC) Civil Litigation Law, which came into effect on February 4th, 2015, and provided a path choice for the parties' evidence collection methods. This paper studies the current legislative and judicial situation of the obligation system proposed by China instruments, analyzes its existing problems, and puts forward corresponding suggestions for improvement. Suggestions include: firstly, we should add the system of filing obligation in the Civil Procedure Law and expand the subject scope of filing obligation, so as to fundamentally solve the problem that the subject scope is limited to both parties and the protection of private rights cannot be extended. Secondly, it is necessary to set up a specific obligation mitigation standard to protect the interests of applicants under special conditions and improve the application rate of the system. Thirdly, the secret document protection procedure should be established, and the document rejection right of the document holder and the secret trial procedure of the document holder should be expressly stipulated to prevent the disclosure of the holder's secret. Finally, the relief procedure after court review should be set up to protect the relief rights of the parties and provide them with a good legal environment.