“韩寒代笔门”事件的证据法分析

发布时间：2018-11-05 14:26

【摘要】："韩寒代笔门"事件业已成为公共事件,韩寒拟以方舟子侵犯名誉权为由起诉至法院,如果成案,法院将面临判断方舟子一方提出的"韩寒有代笔"这一主张是否属实的难题。方韩案中关于韩寒有无代笔的证明责任可以由法院裁量分配。方舟子一方采用间接证据证明的方式证明其主张,但由于方舟子一方所适用的经验法则具有盖然性,不同主体会得出不同结论,方舟子一方的推论过程存在极大争议。方韩案中,尽管法院有权行使自由裁量权判定代笔事件的真伪,但考虑到确证裁判可能引起的社会舆论压力,法院最有可能作出"证据不足以认定存在代笔事实"的"真伪不明"结论,适用证明责任规则,回避事实争议。即使代笔事件未得到确证,方舟子并非必然承担名誉权侵权责任,法院可以通过对过错要件的认定实现言论自由权与名誉权的利益平衡。方韩之争过程中,公众的证据科学意识得到前所未有的提升,但也暴露出一些非理性之处。
[Abstract]:Han has become a public event. Han intends to sue Fang Zhouzi for infringing his right of reputation to the court. If the case is successful, the court will be faced with the difficulty of judging whether "Han has a pen" put forward by Fang Zhouzi. In the Fanghan case, the burden of proof on whether Han has a pen can be assigned at the discretion of the court. Fang Zhouzi used indirect evidence to prove his claim. However, due to the inevitability of the rule of thumb applied by Fang Zhouzi side, different subjects would draw different conclusions, and the inference process of Fang Zhouzi side was highly controversial. In the case of Fang Han, although the court has the right to exercise its discretion to determine the authenticity of the substitution incident, it takes into account the pressure of public opinion that may be caused by the confirmation of the judgment. The court is most likely to draw the conclusion that "evidence is not sufficient to determine the existence of the facts", apply the rules of burden of proof, and avoid the dispute of facts. Fang Zhouzi does not necessarily bear the tort liability of reputation right even if the incident is not confirmed. The court can realize the balance between the right of freedom of speech and the right of reputation through the identification of fault elements. During the struggle between Fang and Han, the public's scientific awareness of evidence has never been improved, but it also exposed some irrationality.
【作者单位】：北京航空航天大学法学院;
【分类号】：D920.5;D925.1

【参考文献】