国际刑事诉讼中证据自由原则的确立和发展——兼论国际刑事法院的模式选择

发布时间：2018-05-25 00:40

本文选题：国际刑事诉讼 + 特设刑庭　；参考：《中国刑事法杂志》2010年06期

【摘要】：早在纽伦堡和东京审判中即已确立的证据自由原则是国际刑事诉讼中一脉相承而又不断发展的原则。联合国的特设刑事法庭无论在证据的可采性判断还是在证明力评价阶段都继承了该原则,尤其是在可采性问题上,规定审判庭可采纳任何有相关性和证明价值的证据,并且在实践中将"可靠性"作为暗含的考虑要素。2002年7月1日正式成立的国际刑事法院一方面坚持了证据自由原则,同时又没有完全遵循特设刑庭的"两步走"模式,而是给予审判庭选择权。基于这种模式的弊端,建议国际刑事法院在适当的时候,明确规定"两步走"模式,并摒弃在证据可采性判断阶段考虑可靠性问题的做法。作为证据自由原则的集中体现,国际刑事诉讼中不承认传闻证据排除规则。
[Abstract]:The principle of freedom of evidence, which has been established in the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, is a developing principle in international criminal proceedings. The ad hoc criminal tribunals of the United Nations have inherited this principle, both in the admissibility judgement of evidence and at the evidentiary evaluation stage, in particular by providing that the trial Chamber may admit any evidence of relevance and probative value, On the one hand, the International Criminal Court, which was formally established on July 1, 2002, has upheld the principle of freedom of evidence, but at the same time it has not fully followed the "two-step" model of the ad hoc criminal tribunal. It gives the trial court the right to choose. Based on the disadvantages of this model, it is suggested that the International Criminal Court should, at the appropriate time, clearly stipulate the "two-step" model and abandon the practice of considering reliability in the judgment stage of admissibility of evidence. As a centralized embodiment of the principle of freedom of evidence, the rule of exclusion of hearsay evidence is not recognized in international criminal proceedings.
【作者单位】：华南师范大学法学院;
【基金】：作者主持的2009年度教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目《国际刑事法院证据规则研究》(项目批准号:09YJC820037)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D997.9

【相似文献】