What happened to the dilemma of pursuing responsibility for unjust, false and wrong cases?

The causes of unjust, false and misjudged cases are complex and can be divided into active and passive types. The so-called initiative means that in the initial process of handling a case, some specific reasons have affected the trend of the case, resulting in unjust, false and wrong cases; Passive unjust, false and misjudged cases mainly occurred in some accumulated cases, which were influenced by many factors such as technology, law and handling conditions at that time, which led to the fact that the investigation and evidence collection of cases could not be watertight, or the conviction could not be made according to the legal provisions at that time. However, with the continuous development of the legal system, many evidences do not conform to the laws commonly used in today's society, especially the core legal concept of "no doubt", which leads to the ex-criminals being acquitted due to insufficient evidence after reiterating.

However, no matter what causes the unjust, false and wrong cases, the first reaction of the victims after regaining their freedom is naturally to investigate the relevant responsibilities. However, the progress of accountability in recent years is not optimistic, and most unjust, false and misjudged cases are often difficult to find out. Although the huge state compensation is also one of the obstacles to tracing, many factors, such as the difficulty in obtaining evidence and the unclear responsibility subject, are also obstacles and obstacles that cannot be found out.

In fact, not all victims of unjust, false and wrong cases have been proved innocent through cases. A considerable number of victims reiterated their innocence, mainly because of insufficient evidence. In the end, it is almost impossible to investigate such cases. After all, the age has led to the lack of evidence collection conditions, and the existing evidence cannot form a strict evidence chain. Although the original investigation techniques and conditions have restricted the detection of the case, the main evidence trend will inevitably lead to the late reversal of the case and become a false and wrong case. This is also a fact.

Apart from the compensation proposed by the victims of unjust, false and wrong cases, this statement is actually difficult to establish. After all, there is no relevant evidence to prove each other, which leads to the failure of accountability. In addition, the determination and attitude of judicial organs to pursue responsibility for unjust, false and wrong cases is also an objective condition that leads to the dilemma of pursuing responsibility for unjust, false and wrong cases.