我国瑕疵证据补正证明的实证分析与理论再构

发布时间：2018-11-21 14:19

【摘要】：选取我国东部地区公安司法系统开展瑕疵证据补正证明的实证分析,发现存在瑕疵证据范畴认识不清、瑕疵情形多样、瑕疵发现主体多元、处理方式随意、规范要求混乱、处理程序失范、去瑕疵机会无限、补证不能处理失范等问题。这与我国瑕疵证据规范体系逻辑性弱、理论界学说的多样性、司法实践经验性认识的顽疾、行政审批式的办案经验、诉讼职能混淆、立法与司法理念错位以及三机关冲突解释有关。应明确消弭证据瑕疵的立法目的、回归诉讼职能本质、协调瑕疵证据立法模式、统一证据资格标准,构建简明规范的筛选机制,整合和再构瑕疵证据制度体系。
[Abstract]:This paper selects the public security judicial system in the eastern part of China to carry out the empirical analysis of the correction of defective evidence, and finds that the category of defective evidence is not clear, the defect situation is diverse, the subject of flaw discovery is diverse, the way of handling is arbitrary, and the standard requirements are confused. The processing procedure is out of order, the opportunity to go to the defect is infinite, the supplementary evidence cannot deal with the problem and so on. This is confused with the weak logic of the system of defective evidence norms in China, the diversity of theories in the theoretical circle, the stubborn problems of judicial practice and empirical understanding, the experience of handling cases in the form of administrative examination and approval, and the functions of litigation. The legislation is related to the mismatch of the judicial idea and the interpretation of the conflict between the three organs. We should make clear the legislative purpose of eliminating the defect of evidence, return to the essence of litigation function, coordinate the legislative mode of defective evidence, unify the qualification standard of evidence, construct a simple and standardized screening mechanism, and integrate and reconstruct the system of defective evidence system.
【作者单位】：青岛大学法学院;
【基金】：2013年度司法部国家法治与法学理论研究项目《我国补正证明的实证分析与规范建构》(13SFB5022)的阶段性研究成果之一
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】