MỤC LỤC VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES NGUYEN VAN MINH PROVING ACTIVITIES OF LAWYERS IN THE FIRST INSTANCE TRIAL OF PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT CRIMES FROM PRACTICE I[.]
VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES NGUYEN VAN MINH PROVING ACTIVITIES OF LAWYERS IN THE FIRST-INSTANCE TRIAL OF PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT CRIMES FROM PRACTICE IN THE SOUTHWESTERN PROVINCES Major: Criminal law and criminal procedure Code: 9380104 SUMMARY OF DOCTORAL THESIS OF JURISPRUDENCE HA NOI - 2023 The works was completed at: GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Scientific instructor: Assoc Prof Dr HOANG THI MINH SON Reviewer 1: Assoc Prof Dr Pham Van Loi Reviewer 2: Assoc Prof Dr Tran Dinh Nha Reviewer 3: Assoc Prof Dr Tran Van Luyen The thesis is defended in front of the doctoral thesis grading committee, held at the Graduate Academy of Social Sciences On ……hour , date… month … year 2023 The thesis can be found at: National Library Library of the Library of the Academy of Social Sciences PREAMBLE Urgency of the topic Proving is a core activity, throughout the proceedings, attracting the participation of subjects performing the basic functions of criminal proceedings to clarify the truth of the case Like other subjects, lawyers involved in criminal proceedings perform the defense function through proof activities in order to concretize the defense function, ensure the right to defend, protect the legitimate rights and interests of the accused in proving activities, limit wrongdoing, contribute to the protection of justice and human rights in criminal proceedings Therefore, studying the topic "Providing activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes from practice in the southwestern provinces" is urgent, meaningful in theory and practice Research purpose and task The purpose of the study is to study the theory of the lawyer's proof activities to find out solutions to improve the law related to the lawyer's proof activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes, propose solutions to improve the quality of evidence activities of lawyers in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwestern provinces Objects and scope of research The research object of the thesis is the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes and the practice of applying the law related to the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwestern provinces Research scope of the thesis, focusing on the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes The thesis studies the legal provisions related to the proving activities of defense lawyers, and at the same time has a comparative relationship with the regulations on the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial in criminal procedure models of countries around the world The thesis studies the practice of proving activities of lawyers in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes in the southwestern provinces over a period of 10 years, from 2012 to 2021 Methodology and research methods The thesis is carried out on the basis of the methodology of Marxism-Leninism; Ho Chi Minh Ideology; the Communist Party of Vietnam's views on the state and law, meeting the requirements of perfecting the socialist rule of law state in Vietnam In order to solve research purposes and tasks, the thesis uses research methods, such as: methods of analysis, synthesis, statistics, comparison, systematization, history; typical case study method; practical survey and sociological investigation; interpreting, inducting to solve the problems and research tasks of the thesis New contributions of the thesis The thesis is the first work at the doctoral level to conduct an in-depth and comprehensive study of the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwestern provinces The thesis has the following new contributions: The thesis has contributed to perfecting and developing a theoretical system about the lawyer's proofing activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes such as: concepts, characteristics of lawyer's proof activities, objects , content, meaning, and proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes; factors affecting the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes The thesis analyzes the relevant legal provisions and the practice of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the southwestern provinces; the results achieved; limitations, inadequacies and causes of limitations and inadequacies in the proving activities of lawyers in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwestern provinces The thesis identifies the requirements and proposes solutions to improve the quality of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the southwestern provinces Scientific and practical significance of the thesis About theory: The thesis contributes to the explanation of theoretical issues about the proof activities in criminal proceedings and the proof activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes The research results of the thesis have the meaning of perfecting the law related to the lawyer's proving activities; The thesis has contributed its voice in the development of general theory about the act of proof of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes About reality: In terms of legislation, the research results of the thesis are meaningful to improve the law on the lawyer's proving activities in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes The research results of the thesis are the basis for making requirements and solutions to improve the quality of proof activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes The thesis is also a reference document in research, teaching and learning at specialized training schools of criminal procedure law and legal research institutions Thesis structure In addition to the introduction, conclusion and list of references, the thesis is structured into 04 Chapters and 07 Appendixes Chapter RESEARCH SITUATION OVERVIEW 1.1 Research situation in domestic The research situation in the country includes the following main groups: The group of research works related to the theory of proof activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes; the legal status related to the proving activities, the fact of the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes; Group of works related to solutions to improve the quality of proof activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes In which, the group of research works related to theory is divided into subgroups, such as: group of research works related to proof and proof activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of the criminal case; on evidence and proof, the proof process; the first-instance trial stage, regarding the content, characteristics, nature and role of the first-instance trial; group of studies on the criminal procedure model, the principles of criminal procedure, the basic functions; group of works related to the characteristics of property infringement crimes Domestic research works related to the theory and reality of the law and the practice of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes; related to solutions to improve the quality of proof activities of first-instance trial lawyers for property infringement crimes 1.2 Research situation overseas Research situation overseas, including research works of other countries related to the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of criminal cases Overseas works have provided a wealth of knowledge that reflects the situation and trends of research and proof-of-concept activities in criminal proceedings, and points out theoretical and practical bases for graduate students to acquire and inherit; issues related to the thesis but have not been thoroughly resolved; Issues that need further research 1.3 Evaluate the research situation and the issues that need further research Through analyzing the research situation at home and abroad, it is found that the proving activities of lawyers have been studied and approached by many scientists from different aspects and scopes With the diversity and abundance of works that have achieved important results, solving many fundamental problems that the theory and practice of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes pose Although there have been many research works related to the thesis However, there has not been any research in a comprehensive, indepth and systematic way on the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes, thereby setting the task for the PhD student to carry out his/her thesis research On the basis of absorbing and inheriting the results obtained from previous works, the PhD student will continue to research issues related to the thesis that have not been thoroughly resolved, requiring the PhD student must conduct comprehensive research, in order to ensure the novelty and urgency of the thesis topic Research students need to continue to conduct research on the following issues: Firstly, study and clarify the concept of proof activities and proof activities of lawyers in first-instance trial of criminal cases; the relationship between the lawyer's proving activities and the first-instance trial and property infringement crimes, thereby introducing the concept of the lawyer's proving activity in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes Analyzing and clarifying the content, characteristics, objects, meanings, and factors affecting the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwestern provinces Secondly, research the current state of legal provisions related to the lawyer's proving activities, first-instance trial and property infringement crimes The activities of collecting, examining and evaluating evidence are researched and approached from the perspective of the lawyer's proving activities in order to properly perform the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringemen crimes Thirdly, research, survey, summarize the practice of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of crimes of property infringement, compare and contrast with the laws of some countries around the world Evaluation of the achieved results, limitations, inadequacies and causes of limitations and inadequacies in the evidence activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwestern provinces Fourthly, research, analyze and clarify the requirements for improving the quality of the lawyer's proving activities; solutions to improve the quality of evidence activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwestern provinces The proposed solutions have a scientific and practical basis and are feasible The research works related to the lawyer's proving activities have not been mentioned, studied in depth and systematically Therefore, the PhD student will continue to research so that the thesis becomes a comprehensive, systematic and novel research work in Vietnam 1.4 Research questions and research hypothesis - In order to solve the research tasks, the thesis needs to answer questions related to the research topic content - From the research questions, a theoretical research framework for the thesis has been formed, on that basis, the author makes research hypotheses related to the topic of the thesis “Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes” Chapter THEORETICAL ISSUES ON PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES OF LAWARDS IN THE CAST TRAINING OF PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT 2.1 The concept and characteristics of the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes 2.1.1 The concept of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes 2.1.1.1 The concept of proving activities of lawyers Proof is the central institution throughout the proceedings, from prosecution, investigation, prosecution to trial with the participation of many subjects performing the basic functions of criminal proceedings Proving is the use of evidence to clarify the objective truth of the case Although there are many different opinions, the concept of proof is not fully reflected But in general, the nature and basic characteristics of the proof have also been stated Thus, proof is the process of criminal proceedings of subjects competent to conduct proceedings and participants in proceedings in the collection, examination and evaluation of evidence to clarify objective truths of the case In essence, the act of proof is the process of finding evidence to properly solve a criminal case Proving activity in criminal proceedings is the synthesis of the acts of the procedural subjects in the activities of collecting, examining and evaluating evidence according to the order and procedures prescribed by law in order to clarify the truth objectivity of the case Proving activities of lawyers have a close and intimate relationship with the defense rights of the accused, there can be no defense function that does not contain the content of the defense's proof activities Proving activities of lawyers are an integral part of proof activities in criminal proceedings, this is the proof activities of subjects performing the defense function performed by lawyers to protect their rights and interests legitimate interests of the accused Thus, it can be understood: The lawyer's proving activity is the synthesis of the lawyer's procedural acts in the collection, examination and evaluation of evidence to prove innocence or reduce criminal liability the charge of the accused First-instance trial is a stage of criminal proceedings in which the Court is the first-level adjudicating authority to conduct an objective and comprehensive review and assessment of the circumstances of the case in order to make a decision whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty and deal with other relevant issues in the case From the analysis of related concepts about the act of proof, the activity of the lawyer, the first-instance trial can come up with the concept: Proving activity of a lawyer in the first-instance trial is the synthesis of procedural acts of lawyers in the activities of collecting, examining and evaluating evidence according to procedures prescribed by law to clarify the truth of the case, prove innocence or reduce criminal liability for the accused - Legal signs of property infringement crimes Property infringing crimes are acts that are dangerous to society, committed by a person with criminal capacity, reaching the legal age, with intentional or unintentional fault, and infringing on property relations protected by the Criminal Code Property infringing crimes are a common group of crimes and have legal characteristics about the object; objective side; subject and subjective side Proving activities of lawyers are carried out throughout the proceedings from prosecution, investigation, prosecution to trial In which, the trial is the central stage and the first-instance trial is the convergence of subjects performing the functions of accusing, defending and adjudicating This is the most important stage for subjects to conduct activities to prove to protect their interests Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial are influenced and governed by the characteristics of each different crime group, including the group of property infringement crimes The lawyer's proving activities are not only governed by the nature and procedures of the first-instance trial, but also by the characteristics of property infringement crimes, these factors have affected, influence on the lawyer's proving activities to create a unique feature with specific characteristics for the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes Thus, the concept can be given: Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes is the synthesis of procedural acts of lawyers in the collection, examination and evaluation activities evidence according to the procedure prescribed by law to clarify the truth of the case, prove innocence or relieve the accused of criminal responsibility 2.1.2 Characteristics of the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes Firstly, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes aim to clarify the truth of the case, prove innocence or reduce criminal liability for the accused Secondly, in criminal cases, depending on different groups of crimes, the object of proof of lawyers in the first-instance trial is also different Third, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes have a close relationship with the defense function Fourthly, the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes is a counter-argument for the charging agency to clarify the truth of the case in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the accused accused Fifth, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes have a relationship with the scope of accusations of the Procuracy Sixth, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes are critical and persuasive Seventh, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes have a close relationship with the principle of litigation and the principle of presumption of innocence Eighth, the lawyer's proving activities are independent, on the basis of compliance with the law and professional ethics 2.2 Objects, contents and significance of the lawyer's proof activities in the firstinstance trial of crimes of property infringement 2.2.1 Objects of lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of crimes of property infringement The object of the lawyer's proof in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes are facts and circumstances that are unknown but need to be known and must be clarified with evidence to prove innocence or reduce reduce criminal liability for persons accused of crimes of infringing upon property - Regarding the object of damage: In property infringement cases, the main object of impact is property Determination of necessary property damage, is a mandatory requirement in cases of property infringement crimes, is the basis for criminal prosecution, punishment framework and settlement of problems related to property rights Civil - Criminal tricks: Criminal tricks are one of the objects that need to be proven, and methods and tricks of crime are an important basis for determining the correct crime in cases of property infringement + On criminalization of crimes for property infringement: The criminalization of civil relations is also common in property infringement cases, the prosecuting agency sometimes confuses the relationship between the two parties Civil and criminal law relations lead to the handling of violators of civil obligations by criminal sanctions, mistakes in law application, and criminalization of civil relations -Quantitatively, the consequences of property infringement crimes + Quantitative: Property damage must reach a certain level to be prosecuted for criminal liability If the damaged property is not quantified as prescribed by law, it cannot be prosecuted for criminal liability + Regarding consequences: For crimes of infringing upon property that have a formal form, it is only necessary to perform the act without property damage, while crimes of property infringement with a material component are not required Signs of a crime must include the act, its consequences, and a causal relationship between the act and the consequences 2.2.2 Contents of the lawyer's evidencing activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes The content of the lawyer's proofing activities in the first-instance trial of property infringing crimes is the process of collecting, examining and evaluating evidence by the lawyer, and the lawyer's proofing activities are shown in Fig the trial preparation stage and at the first instance court 2.2.2.1 Activities of collecting, examining and evaluating evidence by lawyers Activities of collecting, examining and evaluating evidence to serve the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property, infringement crimes, expressed through questioning and arguing activities according to defense orientations: prove that the defendant has not committed a crime; change the crime, lighter penalty frame, reduce the penalty for the accused or in the direction of proposing to return additional investigation files to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the accused 2.2.2.2 Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes - Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes include: Proving activities of lawyers in the pre-trial stage and at the first-instance trial, specifically in the arrest procedure the beginning of the trial; in the interrogation procedure and in the argumentation procedure at the court hearing - Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes is the process of listening, analyzing, evaluating, and responding to arguments Defense lawyers will apply all their knowledge, experience and eloquence to present evidences and arguments to clarify the facts of the case, to refute the incriminating evidence or to mitigate the accused It can be said that the demonstration activities of lawyers at the first instance court are the most effective way to defend and protect the best interests of the accused for the crimes of property infringement 2.2.3 The significance of the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes First, the defense activity is essentially a demonstration activity and the lawyer is an important subject, the subject plays a key role in the act of proving, performing the defense function Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes to ensure the right to defend the accused in the process of proving and clarifying the truth of the case Second, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes contribute to limiting wrongdoing The fact that defense lawyers vindicate innocent people is just as important and socially meaningful as the strict handling of offenders to protect public interests and maintain social order Third, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes are aimed at clarifying the truth of the case, contributing to the protection of justice and protection of human rights in criminal proceedings Fourth, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes is a necessary premise for a fair judgment, positively affecting the sense of law compliance and people's belief in law enforcement Justice 2.3 Overview of the evidence activities of lawyers in first-instance trial according to criminal procedure models and some countries in the world 2.3.1 Overview of the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial according to the criminal procedure models Model of interrogation criminal procedure: Upholding crime suppression taking the effectiveness of detecting and handling criminals as an important task of criminal proceedings, "interrogation" is considered the best method to find out the truth of the case, the advantage is to limit omission of crime However, the interrogation model has limitations: Participants are released from the burden of proof This is beneficial for crime control, but does not guarantee human rights and citizenship The basic functions of criminal proceedings have not been clearly separated Litigation criminal procedure model: In the litigation criminal procedure model, litigation is used thoroughly and is the main "method" to find out the truth of the case The basic functions of criminal proceedings are clearly delineated Litigation is the soul of the litigation criminal procedure model, power is shared between the parties, the role of lawyers is promoted right from the beginning of the case through an active and active role of lawyers in the act of proving Litigation results are the main basis for the Court to make judgments, ensure human rights, and limit injustice and wrongdoing However, the litigation model also has 3.1.1 Overview of the provisions on proving activities of lawyers in the criminal procedure law from 1945 to before the promulgation of the Criminal Procedure Code in 2015 3.1.1.1.Regulations on proving activities of lawyers in criminal procedure law from 1945 to before the promulgation of the Criminal Procedure Code in 1988 3.1.1.2 Regulations on proving activities of lawyers in the Criminal Procedure Code 1988 The Criminal Procedure Code in 1988 was born, marking the first time the development and completion of the law of our country The Code clearly stipulates agencies, procedure-conducting persons, procedure participants, legal status, rights and obligations of subjects performing proof activities in criminal proceedings - Regulations on the object of proof and regulations related to the lawyer's proving activities +Regarding the exercise of the right to defense: Compared to the Criminal Procedure Code of 1988, the Criminal Procedure Code of 2003 has added more rights to defense counsels for them to exercise in proof activities, as “The defense has the right to be present when interrogating the accused; give evidence and demands; meeting the accused, the defendant is in temporary detention;…” (Article 36 of the Criminal Procedure Code) +About the first-instance trial procedure: The presiding judge of the court hearing shall administer the questioning, the presiding judge shall then be the judge, the people's juror, the procurator, the defense counsel and the defender of the interests of the involved parties (Article 207) During the argument, the procurator presents the impeachment, then the defendant presents his defense, if there is a defense, this person defends the defendant (Article 217) 3.1.2.Regulations on proving activities of lawyers in the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 - Regulations on the object of proof: The issues to be proved in the criminal case specified in Article 85 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code are clearer and more complete than in the previous Criminal Procedure Codes, adding “Causes and conditions of crime”; "Other circumstances related to the exclusion of criminal liability, exemption from criminal liability, and exemption from punishment" Issues to prove: Firstly, whether the crime occurred or not, the time, place and other details of the case Second, who committed the crime; fault or no fault; have criminal capacity or not; purpose and motive of the crime Third, mitigating and aggravating circumstances of criminal liability and personal characteristics of the accused and defendants Fourth, the nature and extent of damage caused by the crime Fifth, the causes and conditions of the crime Sixth, other circumstances related to the exclusion of criminal liability, exemption from criminal liability, and exemption from punishment This is the newly added content - Regulations on collection, examination and evaluation of evidence: The 2015 Criminal Procedure Code amends and supplements many issues in proof 11 activities In particular, the law stipulates that defense counsels have the right to collect evidence under Article 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code - Regulations on first-instance trial procedures: The procedure for questioning at the first-instance court hearing as prescribed in Article 307 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code has not changed much compared to the 2003 Criminal Procedure Code, the presiding judge of the court session still manages the questioning and the order of questioning, the presiding judge of the court hearing shall ask questions first, then the Judge, the people's jurors, the procurator, and the defense counsel The content of the defense argument is no longer limited as before, but has been expanded Lawyers have rights: “To present their opinions, give documents, evidences and arguments to the procurator about evidences confirming guilt, evidence proving innocence…” (Clause 1, Article 322) - Provisions on the rights of defense counsels: The rights and obligations of defense counsels are stipulated in Article 73 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 Some rights of defense counsels related to the activities of proof are provided, such as, provisions on “Meeting with arrested persons, persons held in custody, accused and defendants being held in custody” (Article 80); “Collect and deliver evidences, documents and objects related to the defense” (Article 81) In particular, it provides defense counsels with the right to collect evidence (Article 88) This is a new, progressive rule, etc - The Criminal Procedure Code 2015 amends and supplements the basic principles of criminal procedure related to the lawyer's proving activities, such as: Principles of ensuring the right of defense of the accused; Principle of Presumption of Innocence and Principle of Litigation in Guaranteed Trial, etc 3.1.3 Evaluation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 on the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial stage Respecting and ensuring human rights and citizens' rights is a pervasive thought in the 2013 Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 has been concretized into specific regulations and requirements, creating a legal basis and a positive shift for criminal procedure activities For the first time, the Criminal Procedure Code of Vietnam officially recognizes two principles related to the proving activities of lawyers, namely the principle of presumption of innocence and the principle of litigation, these are two fundamental principles of breakthrough in criminal proceedings in the spirit of judicial reform The amendments and supplements of the Criminal Procedure Code in 2015 have created a legal basis to fight more effectively with many types of crimes in the period of promoting the application of modern science and technology and international integration The amendments and supplements of the Criminal Procedure Code in 2015 have created a legal basis to fight more effectively with many types of crimes in the period of promoting the application of modern science and technology and international integration Newly added contents overcome the limitations and inadequacies of the Criminal Procedure Code 2003 on proof 12 activities, creating a legal basis for proof activities in criminal proceedings in general and proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in particular 3.2 The practice of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the southwestern provinces 3.2.1 These achievements 3.2.1.1 Overview of the results achieved The Southwest region has an area of 40,548.2 square kilometers, accounting for about 13% of the country's total area The population is 17,367,169 people, including 13 provinces and cities: Can Tho city and provinces: Long An, Tien Giang, Ben Tre, Tra Vinh, Vinh Long, Dong Thap, An Giang, Kien Giang, Hau Giang, Soc Trang, Bac Lieu and Ca Mau Geographical characteristics and urbanization speed affect the social order, the criminal crime situation increases, and the situation is complicated in the southwestern provinces In recent years, the evidence activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of criminal cases in the Southwestern provinces have made great progress, ensuring the right of defense of the accused To achieve this result is due to the growth in the number and quality of lawyers In 2009, the Vietnam Bar Federation was established nationwide with 5,300 lawyers, by 2021 nationwide there are 16,313 lawyers, in 13 provinces in the Southwest region also increased to 1,230 lawyers, the number of lawyers is increasing, next year increase more than last year In the past 10 years, the courts of the Southwest provinces have tried 83,456 cases/134,953 defendants, including 36,209 cases of property infringement crimes with 53,182 defendants, a rate of 43.39% Lawyers participated in proving defense activities 36,0292 cases with 3469 with lawyers, reaching the rate of 9.58% This shows that the number of cases with defense lawyers is still low compared to the total number of cases of property infringement brought to trial According to the survey results on the practice of proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes, about 3% of the lawyer's proposal accepted by the Court changed to a lesser crime; 7% was accepted to move to a lighter penalty frame; the majority of lawyers' proposals on reducing criminal liability were accepted by the Court, accounting for 70%; request to declare the defendant not guilty, to stop the case accepted by the Court as 47 cases/77 defendants 3.2.1.2 The practice of the lawyer's demonstration activities while preparing for trial In the preparatory stage for the first-instance trial, the lawyer's proving activity is to study the case file; contact and exchange with the accused and defendants; make proposals to the proceeding agency, prepare to develop defense arguments, and demonstrate activities of lawyers at court hearings to protect the rights of persons accused of crimes of infringing upon property 3.2.2.2 The practice of proving activities of lawyers at the first-instance trial * In the process of starting the trial: The procedure for starting the trial is important, creating conditions to prepare for the questioning at the trial The correct implementation of the procedure for starting the trial will contribute to ensuring the 13 quality of the evidence and litigation activities between the parties in the later part of the argument * During the interrogation procedure at the trial: The interrogation at the court session is conducted openly with the participation of the parties to examine the evidence in the case file as well as new evidence presented at the court hearing The interrogation part will create a premise for effective debate at the trial * During the proceedings at the trial: Right after the end of the questioning came the debate part This is the time when the role and position of the lawyer is most clearly shown Lawyers will give evidence and arguments to the accuser Arguing is the most effective method of evidence for a lawyer to protect people accused of property crimes In practice, when participating in arguments at the first-instance court hearing, the lawyer chose to present evidence to reduce criminal liability, which was accepted by the Trial Panel to significantly reduce the sentence for the accused If finding that there are grounds to enjoy the suspended sentence, the lawyer shall present evidence and arguments to convince the Trial Panel to accept the defendant to enjoy the suspended sentence; or when finding that there are enough grounds to change the crime, the lawyer needs to point out documents and evidence in the case file that satisfy another crime of a lesser category; In case the procurator determines that the penalty frame is too strict, the lawyer will point out the framing circumstances and change the penalty frame to be lighter and in case the lawyer finds that there is not enough evidence to prove the defendant's crime, there is still a lack of important evidence but cannot be supplemented at the trial, or there is a serious procedural violation, the proposal to return the file for additional investigation is accepted by the court In case the lawyer's defense orientation is to prove that the defendant has not committed a crime, the lawyer shall provide grounds to prove that the defendant did not have the purpose of appropriating property, the offense is not intentional, the damage to property is not quantitative enough to prosecute criminal liability, or criminalize civil relations In fact, at the court hearings, the lawyer said that the procedure-conducting agency had criminalized civil relations, provided evidence to prove that the defendant's act did not constitute a crime, and requested that the trial panel to cancel the sentense, because there is not enough evidence to prove the crime and vindicate the accused For example: Pham Thi Mai's unjust case happened in Soc Trang in 2013 Defendant Pham Thi Mai was prosecuted for two crimes of “Depriving property” and “Deliberately damaging property” Because “The time limit for investigating the case has expired without proving that the accused committed the crime” On 29 June 2020, the People's Court of Soc Trang province issued a Notice on "Acceptance of the claim file of Mrs Mai” Pham Thi Mai was vindicated In particular, an unjust case occurred in Can Tho city against defendant Nguyen Tat Van on the charge of "fraudulent appropriation of property” As a result, the Investigation Police Agency of Can Tho City issued Decision No 01 on 29 April 2021 to suspend the investigation of the criminal case and the 14 investigation of the accused against Nguyen Tat Van The reason for Nguyen Tat Van's behavior is not enough to constitute the crime of "fraudulent appropriation of property" Nguyen Tat Van has been vindicated On the basis of analyzing the results of the evidence activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes from practice in the southwestern provinces, it is possible to draw the following conclusions: In many cases, the evidence and arguments of the lawyer convinced the Trial Panel to declare the defendant a lighter penalty than that proposed by the Procuracy; accept the defendant's suspended sentence; return the file to reinvestigate or declare the defendant not guilty v.v… This clearly shows the role and importance of lawyers in proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the Southwest provinces 3.2.2 Limitations and obstacles in proofing activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement cases in the Southwest provinces and causes 3.2.2.1 Limitations and obstacles in the provisions on first-instance trial - About the procedure for questioning at the trial Clause 2, Article 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code stipulates: “When interrogating each person, the presiding judge of the court session shall ask questions first and then decide to let the judge, juror, procurator and defense counsel…” Because of this provision, the presiding judge of the trial plays an active role in interrogation activities, the accusing and exonerating parties only ask side questions and ask questions later, so their questioning is easily duplicated, boring, less sharp, only ask for additional details that not clarify the nature of the case - About the procedure for arguing at the trial When arguing the defense has the right: “Present their opinions, documents, evidences and arguments to the Procurator about the evidences determining guilt and proving innocence.…”(Clause 1, Article 322) However, the prosecutor's opinion is often more important than the lawyer's defense, and the lawyer's argument time is limited by the will of the presiding judge, the lawyer's opinions are not fully reflected in the judgment, affecting the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes With the rule“Procurators must present evidences, documents and arguments to respond to every opinion of the accused, defense counsels and other procedure participants at the court hearing (Clause 2, Article 322) However, there is still a situation where the Procurator does not respond or if he does, he does not come to the same opinion, the Prosecutor often only argue through perfunctory speakers, even keeping the prosecution's opinion "for safety” Regulations at the court hearing, if the procurator withdraws the entire prosecution decision, the trial will still be conducted (Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Code), which is unreasonable We believe that the existence of the accused's proving activities is indispensable for the existence of defense and trial subjects Thus, when the Procurator withdraws the entire decision to prosecute, which means that there is no longer a charge, the trial operation has no reason to 15 exist, the court must declare the defendant not guilty in order to fully comply with the principle of presumption of innocence 3.2.2.2 Limitations and problems in exercising the rights of defense counsels The 2015 Criminal Procedure Code has expanded the right to collect evidence for defense counsels, creating a legal basis for the act of proving lawyers according to (Clause 2, Article 88, 2015 Criminal Procedure Code) However, when the defense actively meets, it is often refused, does not cooperate, and the lawyer cannot collect evidence, therefore, how can the lawyer have evidence to argue on an equal footing with the accuser To the right“request agencies, organizations and individuals to provide evidence” that is not easy, the defense always faces many difficulties, it is not possible for the lawyer to collect evidence by this method Clause 3, Article 81, 2015 Criminal Procedure Code stipulates: If“In case it is not possible to collect evidence , the defense counsel may request a competent agency to conduct the proceedings to collect it” However, due to the lack of clear regulations on implementation procedures, the defense counsel's proposal was not effective, the procedure-conducting agency did not create favorable conditions and caused difficulties 3.2.2.3 Other limitations and problems - On the implementation of the principles of criminal procedure: The principles of criminal procedure have a positive impact on the activity of proof However, in practice, the two principles of litigation and the principle of presumption of innocence have not been thoroughly followed and come into practice, still faint at the first-instance trial, the imposition of the will of the proceedings-conducting agency during interrogation according to the "presumption of guilt" prejudice still occurs, it is detrimental to the lawyer's proving activity 3.2.3 Causes of limitations and problems * Legal reasons - Inadequacies in the provisions of the law on first-instance trial Practice shows that the provisions of the law related to the lawyer's proof activities in the first-instance trial reveal the following shortcomings: Firstly, the provisions on the right to request the summoning of persons who need to be questioned at the court hearing; about the defendant's absence and the defense counsel at the court hearing has not yet ensured the defendant's right to defense Secondly, Inadequacies in the indictment disclosure procedure in Article 306 Thirdly, Regarding the questioning procedure and responsibility for questioning in Article 307, it is still very formal and does not guarantee litigation Fourthly, Clause 3, Article 321 stipulates that the Procurator's proposal to apply the penalty, penalty level, compensation liability, etc., before arguing, is unreasonable Fifthly, Clauses and of Article 322 need to have written explanations and instructions for uniform application Sixthly, Article 325 and Clause of Article 326 are not clear, because when the procurator has withdrawn the entire decision to prosecute, terminate the charge, declare the defendant not guilty, and terminate the trial, but the Court still proceed with the trial as the case of not withdrawing the prosecution, which is not reasonable 16 - Inadequacies in provisions on the rights of defenders The Criminal Procedure Code 2015 stipulating the right to collect, examine and evaluate evidence of defense counsels has many shortcomings In general, the rights of defense counsels are provided for in Articles 73, Article 80, Article 81, and Article 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code.v.v… However, most of these regulations still have many limitations and shortcomings, not guarantee the real rights of defense counsels in proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of crimes of property infringement - Inadequacies in other relevant regulations + The principles of criminal procedure have a close relationship with the activity of proof, especially the principle of litigation and the principle of presumption of innocence, which positively affects the proving activities of lawyers But in practice, these principles have not been followed and put into practice, affecting the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes + Regulations on “The responsibility to prove the crime belongs to the competent procedure-conducting agency” (Article 15) is inconsistent with the judicial function of the Court; regulations for the Procuracy to supervise the observance of law in adjudication activities; The court's return of the file for additional investigation is also inappropriate, does not ensure publicity and transparency, and affects the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes + The reason for the criminal procedure model Currently, the criminal procedure model in our country is still an interrogation procedure with interwoven elements of litigation in adjudication activities Thus, if there are only a few laws regulating the proceedings at the trial, it is considered that our country's criminal procedure has absorbed the reasonable kernels of the litigation criminal procedure model hasty and unconvincing The interrogation criminal procedure model does not prioritize the choice of competition to determine the truth of the case to ensure human rights and proof activities, the procedural functions need to be separated to create a "two-party" nature in litigation activities However, our country's criminal proceedings still not have a clear division of functions, leading to overlapping functions, reducing the effectiveness of the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes, and fail to create a driving force to promote the effectiveness of criminal proceedings + Reasons for the implementation The organization of law enforcement is considered to be the most restrictive stage in the legal adjustment mechanism, but the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 still has many shortcomings that have not been explained and guided for uniform application The coordination mechanism between agencies competent to conduct proceedings and judicial support agencies is not close and synchronized The organization of agencies competent to conduct proceedings is specified in the 17 Law on Organization of the People's Courts; Law on Organization of the People's Procuracy; The Law on Organization of the Investigation Agency, etc., has many shortcomings and overlaps Regarding the organization of law practice as prescribed in the Law on Lawyers and the Law on Legal Aid However, many regulations are still inadequate, not guaranteeing the self-governing role of professional organizations of lawyers, affecting the proof activities in criminal proceedings in general and the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in particular - The cause is the perception of the subject conducting and participating in criminal proceedings + Reasons from the lawyer's side The function of a lawyer is to protect justice and social justice However, there are still some lawyers who are not brave enough, morally degraded, not respect objective truth In fact, here and there are still a few lawyers who are dominated by interests, deliberately changing white instead of black because of the remuneration that the client promises to pay, making it difficult for investigation, prosecution and trial activities, violating the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct of Lawyers, negatively affect the evidence activity leading to the omission of the criminal or unjustification of the accused for the crimes of infringing upon the property Due to difficult economic conditions, the demand for defense lawyers is not much, lawyers are not enough to live by their profession The qualifications of lawyers are spread and uneven, the majority of law-practicing organizations are small in size and have a narrow field of operation (law office, law firm), not specialize in criminal proceedings, lawyers are mainly concentrated in big cities, so they have not met the demand for defense rights for people in remote and isolated areas + Reasons from agencies and persons competent to conduct proceedings The capacity, level of ethical quality and awareness of the people conducting the proceedings will determine the quality of the evidence activities, but most of them are not properly aware of the role and importance of the advocate They believe that lawyers participating in the case will cause difficulties, so they are strict and wary when there are lawyers involved in the case, creating certain difficulties and obstacles for law practice, including the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes + The cause is from the propagation and education of the law The education level in our country is still low compared to the development of society In many cases, people still have incorrect perception when they think that hiring a defense lawyer will be expensive or when asking a lawyer, they have to defend their innocence These distorted thoughts affect the law practice activities, including the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of crimes of property infringement In addition, the propagation and dissemination of legal education has not been really effective, mainly due to part-time work and not paying attention to the dissemination and education of law to the people 18 Chapter REQUIREMENTS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LAWYER'S PROVING ACTIVITIES IN THE FIRST-INSTANCE TRIAL OF PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT CRIMES IN THE SOUTHWESTERN PROVINCES 4.1 Requirements to improve the quality of lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the southwestern provinces 4.1.1 Request to protect human rights, especially the rights of the accused and defendants in criminal proceedings Ensuring human rights is a measure and a common goal of society Respecting, protecting and ensuring human rights and citizens' rights is a crosscutting thought in the 2013 Constitution and has been concretized by the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code When it comes to human rights, the human rights of the accused are the most important The accused or defendants have the right to defend themselves or ask a lawyer to defend them When the human rights of the accused (defendant, etc.) and vilolated, then the best method is through the Court and through the evidence activity of the lawyer, including the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes 4.1.2 Requirements to build a just, democratic and civilized society Ensuring fairness, democracy, respecting and protecting human rights and citizens' rights in criminal proceedings is a measure of the progress of a democratic judiciary; This also aims to meet the requirements of building a just, democratic and civilized society Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in order to perform the defense function and help the Court to make a correct judgment; thereby, not leaving criminals behind, not doing injustice to innocent people, contributing to protecting justice, citizens' freedom and democracy, and building a democratic, fair and civilized society 4.1.3 Requirements to continue judicial reform Judicial reform requires renovating and perfecting the organization of judicial agencies, criminal procedures, rights and obligations of subjects, ensuring a clear delineation of the basic functions of the criminal procedure in accordance with the tasks and powers of the subjects conducting the proceedings and the participants in the proceedings, upholding the role of lawyers in general and the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in particular 4.1.4 Requirement to prevent and fight crimes The requirement of crime prevention and fighting is always one of the regular and long-term tasks, making an important contribution to ensuring national defense - security and foreign affairs; Only then will we create a stable and healthy social environment and foundation for socio-economic development In recent years, the crime situation has become very complicated; If the lawyer's proofing activities are done well, it will have a positive impact on the prevention and combat of crimes in general and the prevention and combat of crimes of property infringement in particular 19 In order to minimize the situation of violations of the law, it is necessary to improve the capacity of the procedure-conducting agencies, highlighting the role of first-instance trial lawyers in criminal cases, which plays an important role in the fight against crime 4.1.5 Requirements for international integration in criminal justice In the current period, the country's international integration process is taking place strongly, the judicial agencies have expanded their cooperation to participate in signing many international treaties; can be mentioned as: Covenant on civil and political rights; Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Convention Against Torture, etc It is necessary to strengthen international cooperation in the fight against crime Our country's criminal justice needs to study and absorb advances in proof activities in criminal proceedings; at the same time, must aim to protect justice, protect human rights, in accordance with international treaties to which Vietnam is a member, and meet the current process of globalization and international integration 4.2 Solutions to improve the quality of lawyer's proving activities in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes in the southwestern provinces 4.2.1 Solution to complete the law One of the solutions to improve the quality of the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes is to improve the law on first-instance trial, on the rights of the accused and the rights of defense counsels as well as other regulations related to the lawyer's proving activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes 4.2.1.1 Completing the law on first-instance trial It is necessary to complete the law before opening the court session on the right to request the summoning of persons to be questioned at the court hearing; the absence of the accused and the defense needs to be amended and supplemented so as to ensure the maximum presence of the defense to form the litigants; thus ensuring equal rights of defense counsels with procurators at court hearings Regarding first-instance procedures, it is necessary to amend and supplement Article 306 in the direction of removing the procedure for announcing the indictment; should be replaced by the procedure for presenting the summary of the indictment, where the accused may present his or her opinion on the charge; Article 307 needs to be amended and supplemented on the order and responsibilities of questioning in the direction that the procurator and the defense counsel are asked the main question, the procurator asks first to accuse, the lawyer later asks to clear the crime; The court administers the inquiry It is necessary to amend Clause 3, Article 321 in the direction of removing the provisions on the Procurator's proposal to apply the penalty, the level of the penalty, etc., before the debate is over; Clause 2, Article 322 should have written explanations and instructions clearly showing the responsibilities of the procurator when responding; Clause 2, Article 325 when the procurator withdraws the entire decision to prosecute, the court must declare the defendant not guilty; Clause 4, Article 326 is also not clear and definitive Because, when the Procurator has withdrawn the 20 entire decision to prosecute, that is, to terminate the criminal activity, the adjudication activity has no reason to exist; The court must declare the defendant not guilty, stop the trial, that is only reasonable 4.2.1.2 Completing the law on the rights of defense counsels Firstly, it is recommended to amend and supplement Point a, Clause 1, Article 73 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 in the direction of expanding the right to collect evidence of defense counsels to ensure the real rights Second, when collecting evidences, defense counsels have the right to record testimonies, audio and video recordings and these persons must sign and point at documents prepared by the defense as evidences; Relevant agencies, organizations and individuals are obliged to provide documents and evidences to the defense counsel within 15 days Third, defense counsels have the right to keep evidence for their own use, not necessarily forcing them to hand over evidences to competent procedureconducting agencies Fourthly, the agency competent to conduct the proceedings must be responsible for collecting evidences at the request of the defense counsel within a reasonable time Fifth, it is necessary to supplement regulations on the order and procedures for the defense counsel to collect evidence as a means of proof Sixth, Article 80 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code needs to have specific provisions on the right of lawyers to meet privately with the accused and defendants in detention camps; When the first testimony is taken or when the accused confesses, a lawyer must be present 4.2.1.3 Completing other relevant regulations - Completing some basic principles of criminal procedure The principle of criminal procedure is the guideline and orientation for the entire procedural activities, especially the principle of litigation and the principle of presumption of innocence; These are two breakthrough principles that positively affect the proof activities in criminal proceedings Competent agencies need to issue explanatory and guiding documents so that these two principles are fully followed and effectively promoted in practice At the same time, releasing the Court from the obligation to prove the crime specified in Article 15; amending Article 20 in the direction that the procurator only exercises the right to prosecute (the function of accusing), has no responsibility to supervise the observance of the law in adjudicating activities; remove the provision on returning additional investigation files to ensure the principle of litigation, the principle of presumption of innocence, the right of defense of the accused and the proving activities of lawyers 4.2.2 Other solutions 4.2.2.1 Completing the Vietnamese criminal procedure model Completing the criminal procedure model is an objective requirement that cannot be based on subjective will but requires preparation in all aspects, in accordance with the political, socio-economic conditions of our country To meet these requirements, it is required to renovate the Vietnamese criminal procedure model in the direction of thoroughly grasping the requirement of increasing litigation; at the same time, resolutely eliminate negative factors that are 21 undemocratic and unequal in criminal proceedings Clearly divide the functions according to the direction, the functions of accusation, denunciation and judgment are independent and cannot be assigned to the same agency or the same subject to perform, avoiding overlapping of functions On that basis, clearly define the position and role so that each subject can only perform its inherent function, bringing the subjects back to their legal function; thus, the Court will return to its true role as an impartial and objective arbitrator; thereby, creating a driving force to promote the effectiveness of criminal proceedings as well as proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes 4.2.2.3 Completing the organization and operation of the proceedings-conducting agencies In terms of organization, it is necessary to arrange and sue the entire apparatus of procedure-conducting agencies in the direction of compactness, effective and efficient operation, and ensure adequate staffing for the investigative agency, the Procuracy and the Court In management and administration, the regime must be centralized and unified in each branch and each level; must strengthen responsibility, promote independence and creativity of individuals, but must follow the direction and unified administration of superiors in law application activities; Besides, it is necessary to coordinate in inspection to detect violations in order to promptly handle them, ensure the rights of defense counsels, and avoid causing injustice to innocent people 4.2.2.4 Raising awareness of those who perform the functions of criminal proceedings - For the lawyer team Firstly, building a team of lawyers in sufficient quantity and increasing quality in the direction of being good at professional skills, having strong moral and political qualities, updating legal knowledge; at the same time have professional practice skills and practical knowledge to meet the requirements of the legal profession Secondly, the lawyer training program must ensure the scientific and reasonable nature, reflecting the modern training point of view; must ensure reasonable absorption of foreign experiences, in accordance with the reality of Vietnam Thirdly, perfecting the institution of lawyers and practicing law in the direction of improving the position and role of lawyers in society; at the same time, strengthen the position and promote the role of the Vietnam Bar Federation in the management of lawyers and law practice Fourth, strengthen the implementation of the principle of state management with the self-governing role of the lawyer's organization; effective exchange and cooperation between Vietnamese lawyers and law organizations and countries in the region and the world; strengthen the examination, inspection and handling of violations of the Code of Conduct and ethics of law practice; there is a form of honoring titles and awarding prizes to lawyers with good achievements Fifth, have a policy to encourage the need for lawyers to use legal services with easy and convenient access in remote and remote areas It is necessary to have a policy and regime of remuneration and remuneration 22 for the defense lawyer's proving activities in property infringement cases at the request of the proceeding agency; these policies and regimes must be commensurate with the efforts that lawyers have invested in encouraging lawyers Sixth, in order to improve the quality of the lawyer's proving activities, it is necessary to have an orientation to develop the team of lawyers in both "quality" and "quantity" Proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes must not only have a "mind" but also a "scope"; that is, equal or even superior to the prosecution in collecting, examining, and evaluating evidence supporting the innocence or reducing criminal liability of the accused - For agencies and persons competent to conduct procedures In fact, those who are competent to conduct legal proceedings still have an incorrect perception, even downplaying the role of lawyers, thinking that lawyers participating in the case will cause difficulties and obstacles to legal proceedings; they are not yet aware that the lawyer's proving activities not hinder but contribute to clarifying the truth of the case; thereby, helping the Court to make the right judgment, not to ignore the criminal, not to unjustly blame the innocent Moreover, it is necessary to remove the mentality of disdain, lower the role of lawyers of those who have the authority to conduct the proceedings, consider lawyers participating in defense only for enough components, as decoration for the court session It is necessary to renew the previous interrogationoriented proceedings into litigation in the spirit of judicial reform; It is necessary to change drastically from awareness to action, ensuring litigation is the responsibility of the agency competent to conduct the proceedings It should be recognized that the lawyer's act of proof is a necessary oversight for determining the truth of the case, and is not intended to cause difficulties for the proceedings In addition to renewing awareness, it is necessary to regularly organize training courses, fostering professional skills for the team of investigators, procurators and judges who are "good in their profession and well-versed in the law"; It is necessary to ensure the good application of legal knowledge and professional skills in practice to meet the requirements of judicial reform - Strengthening legal propaganda and education In criminal proceedings, raising people's awareness of the role of defense lawyers will contribute to improving the quality of litigation at the trial In order to that well, it is necessary to propagate, disseminate and educate the law, in which it is necessary to improve people's understanding of ensuring the right to defend and demonstrate activities of lawyers in court In addition, it is necessary to further strengthen the law propaganda and education activities so that people are properly aware of the role of defense lawyers in the proof activities; Thus, towards the common goal of clarifying the truth of the case Parallel to that purpose, the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes are also to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the accused In the trial of property infringement cases, it is necessary to pay attention to the cases of effective defense lawyers for the accused; special attention should be paid to those who are wrongly accused in the cases of property infringement brought to trial at the first instance court 23 CONCLUSION Research on the topic of the thesis “proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes from practice in the southwestern provinces” shows that the content is related to many basic issues of criminal proceedings Proving activity (core activity) of criminal proceedings, in which the proving activity of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes is a new issue that has not been studied This is the first time the thesis has studied in-depth, comprehensively, clarifying related concepts; the thesis also studies the relationship of the lawyer's proving activities with the firstinstance trial and the crimes of property infringement, on the subjects and characteristics; Along with that is the content and meaning of the lawyer's proofing activities in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes The thesis clarifies the intimate relationship between the lawyer's proving activities and the defense function The lawyer's proving activities are primarily aimed at the common goal of determining the objective truth of the case; At the same time, the lawyer's proving activities also aim to refute a part or all of the accusation or reduce the criminal liability of the accused; thereby making an important contribution to ensuring balance and harmony between public and private interests, and protecting justice The thesis clarifies that the lawyer's proving activities are the thinking and practical activities of the defense subject; This activity is governed by the characteristics of property infringement crimes, the nature and form of the firstinstance trial of criminal cases With the interference and reception of positive elements between criminal procedure models towards a democratic procedure that recognizes and upholding the principle of litigation and presumption of innocence, ensures human rights and proof activities in criminal proceedings, renovates the awareness of procedural functions, clearly defining the operational purposes of the subjects, continues to inherit the inherent advantages of the current criminal procedure model Since then, step by step perfecting the law on proof activities in criminal proceedings in general and in the proof activities of lawyers in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes in particular On the basis of theoretical and practical research on the proving activities of lawyers in the first-instance trial of property infringement crimes in the southwestern provinces, the author has analyzed and clarified the positive aspects, the achieved results as well as the limitations, inadequacies and causes; from there, propose solutions to improve the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 related to the proving activities of lawyers in criminal cases; As a result, it contributes to improving the quality of the lawyer's proof activities in the firstinstance trial of property infringement crimes, meeting the requirements of judicial reform./ 24 LIST OF AUTHOR'S PUBLISHED WORKS RELATED TO THE THESIS TOPIC Nguyen Van Minh (2018), “Some issues about the lawyer's proving activities in criminal proceedings and the relationship with the defense function”, Social Science (01), pg 1-11 Nguyen Van Minh (2019), “Characteristics of the lawyer's proving activities in Vietnamese criminal proceedings”, Social science (03), pg 3749 Nguyen Van Minh (2019), “The relationship of the proof activities of the subjects performing basic functions in criminal proceedings”, Social Science Human Resources (02), pg 3-11 Nguyen Van Minh (2022), “The relationship between the lawyer's proving activities and the principle of presumption of innocence”, Social Science Human Resources (01), pg 45-53 Nguyen Van Minh (2022), “Evidence collection activities by lawyers in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 - problems and suggestions”, People’s Court (16), pg 16-20