| Faced with such complex situations as the difficulties in grasping conditions of arrest, constraints encountered in litigation reform, and the infeasibility of carrying out fundamental reform of the arrest system through the revision of law in the near future, the re-reform of the arrest system in China should go beyond the traditional thinking mode that depends heavily on legislative reformation and turn to legal dogmatics to expand the reform space. Re-defining arrest as an intervention in civil rights through dogmatic analysis from the constitutional perspective can provide not only theoretical support to the re-interpretation of arrest litigation reform, but also justification for the review of conditions of arrest. In addition, through the application of legal dogmatics, the common theory of “three essential elements of arrest” can be restructured to form a system of objects of proof with social risk as its core, and the standards of proof can be redefined. What's more, according to legal dogmatics, there is no systematic obstacle to the review of the arrest litigation reform. In a word, legal dogmatics can not only remedy the deficiencies in the legislative-style criminal justice reform, but also promote the diversification and transformation of the research method of criminal procedure law, thereby contributing to the construction of a Criminal Procedure Law interpretation community. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号