非法证据排除规则的实践应用探索

发布时间：2018-01-23 19:13

本文关键词： 非法证据证明责任证明标准保障人权威慑理论　出处：《吉林大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：非法证据排除规则起源于英美法系，美国于20世纪初通过威克斯案、马普案及里昂案发展出了非法证据排除规则并将该规则统一适用于各州，后来又陆续通过纳多恩案、王森案、默里案及尼克斯案确立了毒树之果规则及其例外规则。大陆法系的代表国家德国的刑事诉讼法则强调，得以裁判案件事实的基础应当是未经禁止使用的证据，而且这些证据要经过严格的证明程序。因此德国法院用以对被告人定罪量刑的证据都是首先具备了证据资格然后又经过法定证明程序予以证明的证据，围绕隐私权、人身权等重要权益德国制定了颇具特色的非法证据排除规则。非法证据排除规则，通常指法庭不应使用侦查人员通过暴力、威胁等非法手段取得的证据，在刑事审判中该非法证据不得作为对被告人定罪量刑之根据，后又发展到非法证据同样不能作为批准逮捕、提起公诉或搜查扣押之依据，被告人可以因法庭将非法证据作为定案之根据提出上诉。我国刑事诉讼法历来要求侦查机关收集犯罪证据并由公诉机关完成追诉犯罪、打击犯罪的任务，近年来又逐步要求司法机关在侦查及起诉过程中，奉行程序正义，保障基本人权。我国要成为社会主义法治国家，就必须建立起自己的非法证据排除规则，这套规则旨在通过威慑作用以消除刑讯逼供、暴力取证，达到尊重并保障人权和维护司法尊严及公正的积极作用。作为一名刑事法官，笔者在审判实践中确实遇见过被告人提出遭受刑讯逼供的情况，对于非法证据排除中的困惑也成为了实务中关注的焦点。本文的研究，笔者将对参与审理的一起涉黑案件进行探讨，提举被告人和辩护人同公诉机关在非法证据调查阶段的矛盾焦点，对理论和实务中的难点及疑问予以分析和回应。在我国非法证据主要包括：通过暴力、威胁等非法手段获得的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的供述和被害人陈述及证人证言这类非法言词证据以及不符合法定程序，可能严重影响司法公正的非法实物证据。公诉机关必须对自己提供的证据的合法性承担举证责任，而且要达到确实、充分的程度，，当事人只需要提供该证据的系不合法取得的线索即可启动调查程序。当法庭对证据的合法性存在疑问之时，该证据材料即应作为非法证据予以排除，即因不具备证据资格而根本不能称其为证据；如果法庭认为这些证据具有充分理由可以使人信服并据此做出证据合法的判断，那么此时公诉机关的证明已经排除了合理怀疑从而达到了确实、充分的程度。只要发现了非法证据，无论在侦查阶段还是审查起诉阶段，侦查机关、检察机关均可以依据刑事诉讼法的非法证据规则将非法证据予以排除，以践行威慑理论并保障被告人的人权。关于法院审判过程中非法证据应何时被排除理论和实践均存在争议，但笔者认为既然法律专门设置了非法证据的调查程序，那么在该程序结束后合议庭即应进行评议，并将调查结果予以公布，否则非法证据势必影响法官的自由心证。非法证据排除规则是我国刑事诉讼法修改的重要内容，作为约束取证行为以践行威慑理论和保障人权及公民权利的重要制度，虽然在适用过程中还会存在诸多问题，但追求正义的脚步不会停歇，相信不久的将来法治中国必将崛起！
[Abstract]:The exclusionary rule originated in the Anglo American law system, the United States through the case of Weekes in the early twentieth Century, MAPP and Leon case develops the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence and the rules applies to the state, and later by Donne case, Wang Sen case and Nicks case, Murray established fruit of the poisonous tree rules and exceptions emphasize the rules. The representative of the continental law system of Germany's criminal procedure law, the basis to referee the facts of the case should be banned without evidence, and the evidence must undergo a rigorous proof procedure. Therefore the German court for the defendant's conviction and sentencing evidence is first of all with the qualification of evidence and then through legal procedures to prove to prove the evidence on the right to privacy, illegal evidence of personal rights and other important rights and interests of Germany has developed a distinctive rule.
The exclusionary rules, the court should not be used normally fingering the investigators through violence, threats and other illegal means to obtain evidence in the criminal trial of the illegal evidence is not as to according to the defendant's conviction and sentencing, later development of the illegal evidence is not the same as approval of arrest, prosecution or filed according to search and seizure, the defendant the illegal evidence as the verdict of appeal for according to the court.
The criminal procedure law of our country has always been the investigation organ to collect criminal evidence and completed by the public prosecution to prosecute crime crime task in recent years and gradually require judicial authorities in the investigation and prosecution in the process of pursuing procedural justice, to protect basic human rights. China should become a socialist country under the rule of law, we must set up their own illegal evidence the rule, this set of rules aimed at deterrence to eliminate the inquisition by torture, evidence of violence, to respect and protect human rights and safeguard the dignity of the judiciary and the positive role of justice.
As a criminal judge, the author in the trial practice really met the defendant proposed by the inquisition by torture, to the exclusion of illegal evidence in the confusion has become the focus of attention in practice. In this article, the author will participate in the hearing of the case involving the Mafia to lift the defendant and counsel with public prosecution authorities in the stage of illegal evidence investigation focus of conflict, to analyze and respond to the difficulties and questions in the theory and practice.
Illegal evidence in our country mainly includes: through violence, threats and other illegal means to obtain the criminal suspect, the defendant's confession and the statements and testimony of witnesses this kind of illegal evidence and does not comply with the statutory procedures, may seriously affect the justice of illegal physical evidence. The prosecution must bear the burden of proof on the legality of their evidence to achieve, and indeed, the full extent of the parties need to provide evidence of the Department of illegal clues can be made to start the investigation process. When in doubt the legitimacy of the court on the evidence when the evidence should be excluded as illegal evidence, that is because they do not have the qualification of evidence but cannot call it evidence; if the court considers that the evidence is sufficient reason to be convincing evidence and make legal judgment, so that the public prosecutor has In addition to reasonable doubt, it has reached a true and sufficient degree.
If found illegal evidence, whether in the investigation stage or the stage of review and prosecution, investigation organs, procuratorial organs can be based on the rules of illegal evidence in criminal procedure law will be to exclude illegally obtained evidence, in order to practice the theory of deterrence and protect the human rights of the accused. The court trial process about illegal evidence should be excluded when the theory and practice are controversial but, I think that since the investigation procedure law specifically set up illegal evidence, then in the program after the end of the collegial panel shall be reviewed, and the findings to be published, otherwise it will affect the judge's potential illegal evidence freeproof.
Exclusionary rule is an important content of modification of the criminal procedure law of our country, the important system as a constraint to practice the theory of deterrence act and the protection of human rights and the rights of citizens, although in the process of the application also has many problems, but the pursuit of justice will not stop the pace of the rule of law, I believe that in the near future China will rise!

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】