审判中心主义视域中司法证明的逻辑反思与重塑

发布时间：2018-06-17 09:48

本文选题：审判中心主义 + 司法证明　；参考：《浙江社会科学》2017年01期

【摘要】：以审判为中心的庭审实质化改革就是要求诉讼证据出示在法庭、案件事实查明在法庭,这即是要求控辩审三方间的司法证明也必须展现在法庭。创新与审判中心主义相适应的司法证明理论是刑事诉讼制度改革的重要内容。由于司法证明高度符合"论辩论证"的目的性、多主体、动态性和对话式等特点,因而司法证明是作为论辩论证的。从论辩论证的视角看,司法证明是一个控诉方和辩护方提出支持论证支持其主张,提出反论证辩护其主张,从而试图说服审判方接受其主张的论辩论证,在这一过程中审判方需要认证证据的合法性、客观性和相关性,从而评估双方的论证,检验是否符合一定的证明标准,判定是否满足相应的举证责任和说服责任。
[Abstract]:The essential reform of trial is to require the evidence to be produced in court and the facts of the case to be found in the court, which means that the judicial proof between the three parties of prosecution and defence must also be displayed in the court. The innovation of judicial proof theory adapted to judicial centralism is an important part of the reform of criminal procedure system. Because the judicial proof accords with the purpose, multi-subject, dynamic and dialogue style of "argumentation", the judicial proof is the argumentative argumentation. From the point of view of argumentation, judicial proof is a kind of argumentative argument in which the prosecution and the defence put forward supporting arguments to support their claims, and put forward counter-arguments to defend their claims, thus trying to persuade the judges to accept their claims. In this process, the judge needs to authenticate the legality, objectivity and relevance of the evidence, so as to evaluate the argument of both sides, to test whether the proof meets a certain standard of proof, and to determine whether the burden of proof and the burden of persuasion are satisfied.
【作者单位】：西南政法大学行政法学院;
【基金】：教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“刑事冤假错案发现的分析和评估模型研究”(15YJCZH182) 国家社科基金重点项目“法律论证逻辑研究——面向‘法治中国’建设的整合性和应用性研究”(15AZX019)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】