The defendant said he was subjected to torture to extract a confession. The defense lawyer’s request to obtain the synchronous audio and video recordings of the interrogation was rejected. Can the lawyer criticize the handling agency in court?
Can the defense lawyer comment in court that the evidence in the case violates logic, violates the law, and violates common sense?
Can the defense lawyer criticize the case-handling agency in court for handling a small case as a big one and presuming guilt?
You might say that these are all common sense issues! During the trial, if the lawyer finds problems, of course they need to point them out. Does the defense lawyer have to say, ‘You did this without any problems, you did this very well’?
You need to pay attention. Lawyer Ge Yunlong of Wuhu, Anhui, was considered by the case-handling agency to have made inappropriate remarks and defamed the judicial authorities because he said this during the court hearing, and the judicial bureau was asked to give him a penalty and suspend his practice for 6 months.
Let’s talk about the first question: What exactly did Lawyer Ge Yunlong say?
Lawyer Ge Yunlong sent the written defense statement to several well-known criminal defense lawyers across the country, such as Zhou Ze, Si Weijiang, and Liu Changsong.
Zhou Ze’s view is: Although some of the words are a bit intense, they still fall within the scope of normal defense opinions.
Lawyer Liu Changsong’s view is that his defense is professional and conscientious, relatively rational and moderate overall, with slightly more intense wording in some places.
For example:
So, what did Lawyer Ge Yunlong say in court?
Lawyer Xu Fengbin, who co-defended the Feng Haifei case with Lawyer Ge Yunlong, said, “The case that Lawyer Ge was complained about was handled by me together, and I was present throughout the process. I can prove that Lawyer Ge’s court speech was not out of line, and the case handling process was also very serious and responsible.”
Let’s talk about the second question: Can Lawyer Ge Yunlong say this?
Article 37, Paragraph 2 of the “Law on Lawyers”: The opinions of lawyers in court on agency and defense shall not be subject to legal prosecution. However, statements that endanger national security, maliciously defame others, and seriously disrupt the order of the court are excluded.”
In other words, Lawyer Ge Yunlong’s speech did not violate the provisions of the law.
If a penalty is to be imposed simply because the defense lawyer’s defense opinions in court make the case-handling agency unhappy, this is tantamount to abolishing the defense system, or even abolishing the criminal trial system.
Regarding Lawyer Ge Yunlong’s speech, I would like to know, the lawyer’s request to obtain the synchronous audio and video recordings of the interrogation, this request is reasonable, legal, and justified, why is it not provided?
Third: Why should we pay attention to this matter?
Lawyer Ge Yunlong’s experience has attracted the attention of many people. I think that even if you are not a lawyer, you should pay attention to this matter. It’s simple, protecting the right to practice law for lawyers is not protecting their personal interests, but the rights of everyone. No one can guarantee that they will not go to court for a lifetime, and you certainly don’t want your lawyer to only say, ‘Yes, yes, yes, good, good, good’ in court.
The case-handling agency is unhappy and complains about the defense lawyer, which will destroy the defense system and even the lawyer system.
No one has the freedom to be exempt from criticism. Everyone and every unit must accept supervision and criticism, especially the power organs, which must accept criticism and use the rule of law thinking and rule of law methods to carry out work and adhere to the bottom line of the rule of law.
The first peripheral product of “Fadu Law” has been launched, customized for lawyers and fans, long press the QR code in the lower right corner to place an order
Discover more from 自由档案馆
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.