非法证据排除的实践表达

发布时间：2018-03-18 18:01

本文选题：非法证据　切入点：结构性难题　出处：《证据科学》2015年06期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：对228件案件的刑事裁判文书分析可以发现,实践中,非法证据排除申请明显呈现出案件类型集中、申请排除的证据种类集中、申请排除证据的理由集中的"三集中"现象。对于非法证据排除申请,检察院、法院探索形成类型化的应对策略和处理方式。当前,非法证据排除规则的实践运作存在被告人及其辩护律师滥用申请与申请能力不足并存、检察院怠于履行证明责任与举证手段有限并存、法院认知偏差与怠于严格执行非法证据排除规则并存等三大结构性难题。对此,应通过纠正控辩审三方对非法证据排除规则的认知偏差、细化非法证据排除规则、切实强化被告人及其辩护律师申请排除非法证据的能力、进一步落实检察院的举证责任、充分调动人民法院严格执行非法证据排除规则的积极性等加以解决。
[Abstract]:The analysis of criminal adjudication documents in 228 cases shows that, in practice, the application for exclusion of illegal evidence obviously presents a concentration of case types, and the type of evidence applied for exclusion is concentrated. The "three sets" phenomenon of the reasons for applying for exclusion of evidence. With regard to the application for the exclusion of illegal evidence, the procuratorate and the court explored the coping strategies and handling methods to form a typology. At present, The practical operation of the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence exists that the accused and his defence counsel abuse the application and have insufficient ability to apply, and that the procuratorate is lazy to fulfill the burden of proof and the means of proof are limited. There are three structural problems, such as the coexistence of the court cognitive bias and the strict enforcement of the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence. In view of this, we should rectify the cognitive bias of the three parties of prosecution and defense to the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence, and refine the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence. It is necessary to strengthen the ability of the accused and his defense counsel to apply for the exclusion of illegal evidence, further implement the burden of proof of the procuratorate, and fully mobilize the people's court to strictly enforce the rules of exclusion of illegal evidence and so on.
【作者单位】：天津市高级人民法院刑二庭;
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】