Video records were used as evidence for the first time in the city
in settling a civil case involving 70,000 yuan (US$8,464) between a
client and a bank at Pudong New Area People's Court.
According to China's current law, such records can hardly be used
as evidence in court. But on December 30 last year, the Supreme
People's Court issued the Regulation on Evidence in Civil Lawsuits
which said video and sound could be used as long as it did not
infringe on the interests and rights of others.
The regulation will become valid on April 1.
"Although the new regulation has yet to come into effect, the use
of the video was a bold attempt when considering the specialty of
the case," said Fang Jun, spokesman for the court. "The record was
the only convincing evidence in the case."
Zhang Hongliang, a native of Central China's Henan Province,
alleged that he opened an account of 70,000 yuan (US$8,464) on
April 11 at Pudong Branch of Industrial and Commercial Bank of
China.
When he went to withdraw the money in June, the bank turned down
his request, saying the amount had been cancelled on April 11
evening.
The bank said Zhang's son went to deposit 470,000 yuan (US$56,832)
on April 11. However, the son filled in two deposit sheets - one
for 470,000 yuan (US$56,832) and the other for 70,000 yuan
(US$8,464) in his own name and the father's name respectively.
The assistant did not detect the mistake when handling the two
accounts, the bank claimed.
The bank detected the problem later in the day. After watching the
videotape of that day the bank cancelled the amount. It then tried
to explain to Zhang.
"To prove the authenticity of the record, we invited related
judicial departments for an expert testimony," Fang said. "Experts
found that the videotape was not cut and fabricated."
The video clearly showed that the amount that assistant received
was 27 bundles (each bundle has 100 pieces of banknote) of 100-yuan
note, 39 bundles of 50-yuan notes and small change.
"Since it is lawful to install monitoring equipment in banks, and
the record was also proved to be true, so the court rejected
Zhang's request for the money," the court spokesman added.
(China
Daily February 27, 2002)