“印证”证明与事实认定——以印证规则与程序机制的互动结构为视角

发布时间：2018-11-06 09:42

【摘要】：印证证明的理论自从其被提出以来就饱受学术界争议,近年来更被指无力防范错案的发生。比较中西方印证证明的司法实践,可发现作为认知规律的印证模式具有合理性与普适性,而作为法律规范的印证规则,因其内容与本国程序机制的匹配程度不同而存在优劣之分。印证规则与程序机制存在相互限制、相互作用的能动关系。为防范事实认定错误的风险,程序规则的不足推动了诉讼终端的印证规则的产生;程序机制决定了印证规则的基本特点;印证规则与程序机制作为一个整体共同决定刑事诉讼真实发现的任务能否实现,常呈现此消彼长的互动关系。印证规则在我国司法适用中的问题与其粗疏的理论建构难脱干系,但问题的根源却在于我国刑事诉讼程序机制的缺陷及公安司法机关对印证规则的不当适用。针对印证规则在司法适用中的弊端,片面地引入自由心证或是正当程序都是不可行的。对印证规则与程序机制的运用应扬长避短,寻求兼顾真实发现与诉讼效率的最优资源分配方案。
[Abstract]:The theory of corroboration has been controversial since it was put forward, and has been accused of being unable to prevent the occurrence of wrong cases in recent years. By comparing the judicial practice between China and the West, we can find that the confirmation mode of cognitive law has rationality and universality, but as the corroboration rule of legal norm, There are advantages and disadvantages because of the different matching degree between the content and the local procedural mechanism. There is a dynamic relationship between rules and procedural mechanisms that restrict and interact with each other. In order to guard against the risk of the error of the fact, the deficiency of the procedural rules promotes the emergence of the verification rules of the litigation terminal, and the procedural mechanism determines the basic characteristics of the corroboration rules. Verification rules and procedural mechanisms as a whole determine whether the task of the real discovery of criminal proceedings can be realized, often showing a mutual relationship. The problem of confirmation rules in the judicial application of our country is related to its careless theoretical construction, but the root of the problems lies in the defects of the criminal procedure mechanism and the improper application of the confirmation rules by the public security judicial organs. In view of the malpractice of confirmation rules in judicial application, it is not feasible to introduce free testimony or due process unilaterally. The application of verification rules and procedural mechanisms should take advantage of strengths and circumvent weaknesses and seek the optimal resource allocation scheme which takes account of both real discovery and litigation efficiency.
【作者单位】：西南政法大学法学院;
【基金】：2017年西南政法大学资助项目(2017XZQN-20) 四川省哲社重点研究基地纠纷解决与司法改革研究中心2015年度一般项目(2015DJKT17)的资助纽约大学亚美法研究所刑事错案项目的交流活动
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】