Advanced search
1 file | 432.05 KB Add to list

Relativism and universalism in interrogation fairness: a comparative analysis between Europe and China

Wei Wu (UGent) and Tom Vander Beken (UGent)
Author
Organization
Abstract
This paper addresses Chinese interrogation rules from historical and comparative perspectives by relating them to the very different development of interrogation procedure in Europe. A fuller understanding of the evolution of the rules in both contexts is relevant to the present day controversy concerning the universal versus relative nature of interrogation fairness. The comparative analysis reveals that, in fact, the influence of ancient Greek and Chinese civilizations resulted in a great difference between Europe and China regarding legal cultures and institutional arrangements for criminal interrogation procedure. Considering future legal reforms in China, and given the very different historical and institutional context, the likelihood seems low that an ‘autonomous version’ of the right to remain silent and the privilege against self-incrimination will develop on China’s very different soil. However, traditional native resources are also available to legal reformers to ensure a cooperative interviewing style in criminal questioning, and eliminate police-coerced confessions.
Keywords
POLICE, CULTURE, IMPERIAL CHINA, WESTERN-EUROPE, CRIMINAL-PROCEDURE LAW, SELF-INCRIMINATION, DISPOSITION, PRIVILEGE, ORIGINS, DEFENSE, China, Comparative analysis, Criminal interrogation, Criminal justice, Europe, History

Downloads

  • Wei Tom - Relativism and Universalism in Interrogation Fairness a Comparative Analysis between E.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 432.05 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Wu, Wei, and Tom Vander Beken. “Relativism and Universalism in Interrogation Fairness: A Comparative Analysis between Europe and China.” EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH, vol. 19, no. 3, 2013, pp. 183–213, doi:10.1007/s10610-012-9184-0.
APA
Wu, W., & Vander Beken, T. (2013). Relativism and universalism in interrogation fairness: a comparative analysis between Europe and China. EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH, 19(3), 183–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-012-9184-0
Chicago author-date
Wu, Wei, and Tom Vander Beken. 2013. “Relativism and Universalism in Interrogation Fairness: A Comparative Analysis between Europe and China.” EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH 19 (3): 183–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-012-9184-0.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Wu, Wei, and Tom Vander Beken. 2013. “Relativism and Universalism in Interrogation Fairness: A Comparative Analysis between Europe and China.” EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH 19 (3): 183–213. doi:10.1007/s10610-012-9184-0.
Vancouver
1.
Wu W, Vander Beken T. Relativism and universalism in interrogation fairness: a comparative analysis between Europe and China. EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH. 2013;19(3):183–213.
IEEE
[1]
W. Wu and T. Vander Beken, “Relativism and universalism in interrogation fairness: a comparative analysis between Europe and China,” EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 183–213, 2013.
@article{2967658,
  abstract     = {{This paper addresses Chinese interrogation rules from historical and comparative perspectives by relating them to the very different development of interrogation procedure in Europe. A fuller understanding of the evolution of the rules in both contexts is relevant to the present day controversy concerning the universal versus relative nature of interrogation fairness. The comparative analysis reveals that, in fact, the influence of ancient Greek and Chinese civilizations resulted in a great difference between Europe and China regarding legal cultures and institutional arrangements for criminal interrogation procedure. Considering future legal reforms in China, and given the very different historical and institutional context, the likelihood seems low that an ‘autonomous version’ of the right to remain silent and the privilege against self-incrimination will develop on China’s very different soil. However, traditional native resources are also available to legal reformers to ensure a cooperative interviewing style in criminal questioning, and eliminate police-coerced confessions.}},
  author       = {{Wu, Wei and Vander Beken, Tom}},
  issn         = {{0928-1371}},
  journal      = {{EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH}},
  keywords     = {{POLICE,CULTURE,IMPERIAL CHINA,WESTERN-EUROPE,CRIMINAL-PROCEDURE LAW,SELF-INCRIMINATION,DISPOSITION,PRIVILEGE,ORIGINS,DEFENSE,China,Comparative analysis,Criminal interrogation,Criminal justice,Europe,History}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{3}},
  pages        = {{183--213}},
  title        = {{Relativism and universalism in interrogation fairness: a comparative analysis between Europe and China}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-012-9184-0}},
  volume       = {{19}},
  year         = {{2013}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: