行政执法证据与刑事证据衔接的理论基础

发布时间：2019-03-28 08:13

【摘要】：《刑事诉讼法》第52条第2款,为行政执法证据的刑诉运用提供了依据。理解适用该条文,不仅要关注现实必要性,还需论证实体法、程序法和证据法上的正当性。实体法层面,是因为行政、刑事法律的调整对象有交集,行政违法和犯罪的社会危害性有差异,构成要件的认定可共通;程序法层面,是因为我国实行违法、犯罪二元追责机制,犯罪事实往往先从行政执法中探知,违法和犯罪竞合时刑事程序被前置;证据法层面,是因为证明资源的稀缺性和证据的客观关联性。行刑证据的衔接运用,是中国特色话题,在国外的一元追责机制及证据规则体系中,证据没有转换运用必要。法理正当性要迈向程序正当性,在构建和运用行刑证据衔接运用规则时,应注意证据衔接规则与行刑程序衔接机制的区分,公安司法机关要恪守程序正义底线,并注重当事人的司法权利保障。
[Abstract]:Article 52, paragraph 2, of the Code of Criminal procedure provides the basis for the application of administrative law enforcement evidence. To understand the application of this article, we should not only pay attention to the realistic necessity, but also demonstrate the legitimacy of substantive law, procedural law and evidence law. At the level of substantive law, the adjustment objects of administration and criminal law are intersected, the social harmfulness of administrative violation and crime is different, and the identification of constituent elements can be shared. At the level of procedural law, it is because of the dual accountability mechanism of illegal crime and crime in our country, the fact of the crime is often first discovered from the administrative law enforcement, and the criminal procedure is preceded when the law is illegal and the crime is concurrence; Evidence law is due to the scarcity of proof resources and the objective relevance of evidence. The cohesive use of execution evidence is a topic with Chinese characteristics. In the foreign system of unitary accountability and evidence rules, it is not necessary to change the use of evidence. Legal legitimacy should move towards procedural legitimacy. When constructing and applying the rules of convergence and application of the evidence of execution, we should pay attention to the distinction between the cohesive rules of evidence and the cohesive mechanism of the procedure of execution, and the judicial organs of public security should abide by the bottom line of procedural justice. And pay attention to the protection of the judicial rights of the parties.
【作者单位】：四川大学法学院;
【基金】：教育部新世纪优秀人才支持计划资助项目(NCET-13-0395)
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】