Did the court hold a hearing to inform the detainees?

The court will not notify the detainees, because according to the third paragraph of Article 182 of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) (hereinafter referred to as the new Criminal Procedure Law): "After the people's court determines the date of the court session, it shall notify the people's procuratorate of the time and place of the court session, summon the parties, and notify the defenders, agents ad litem, witnesses, expert witnesses and translators. Summons and notices should be served at least three days before the court session. For a case to be tried in public, the cause of action, the name of the defendant, the time and place of the hearing shall be announced in advance three days before the hearing. " "the Supreme People's Court on the application of

The first opinion is that there is no need to summon the defendant in custody, because, first, a summons is a litigation document.

Book, its function is to summon the summoned person to arrive at the designated place on time. When the defendant was detained, his personal freedom was restricted. Even if the court summons is served, the defendant in custody cannot arrive at the designated place on time.

Participate in litigation, so summoning a summons will not only damage the seriousness of the summons, but also have no practical significance; Second, the people's court has served the defendant with a copy of the indictment ten days before the court session and informed him of his relevant litigation rights. defendant

Have sufficient time and energy to prepare to appear in court to participate in litigation, and the litigation rights will be protected by law during the trial, which will not affect the exercise of litigation rights according to law; Third, the new criminal procedure law and its judicial interpretation are generalizations and general norms. The remand ticket specially designed in the Supreme People's Court for hearing the defendant in a criminal case, serving a copy of the indictment or interrogation is a specific litigation document used to summon the defendant in custody, and its effectiveness should be superior to that of a summons. On this basis, summoning the defendant into custody is obviously repetitive and unnecessary, which is not conducive to saving litigation costs and improving litigation efficiency. Fourthly, whether it is the criminal procedure law of 1979, the criminal procedure law of 1996 or the new criminal procedure law, the provisions on summoning the parties three days before the court session have not changed in essence except for the adjustment of the order of the terms. In the trial practice, the local people's courts at all levels generally do not serve the defendants with court summons three days before the court session, and only the bailiff takes the defendants from the detention center to the court to attend the court session with a detention warrant.

The second opinion is that the defendant in custody should also be summoned. The reason is that it is a legal procedure to serve the summons to summon the parties three days before the trial. There is no exception to summoning parties in the current law. The summons is only a formal document used by the people's court to detain and remand the defendant to the detention center, and it does not have the function of summoning the defendant. If the court summons is not served on the defendant according to law, it may affect the parties' exercise of litigation rights because of unfair procedures. Meanwhile, if the defendant or defender is in court,