论我国民事公益诉讼证据规则的立法完善

发布时间：2019-06-22 12:05

【摘要】：2012年修订的民事诉讼法虽然确立了民事公益诉讼制度,但却只有一个条文的原则且相当模糊的规定,对保障其实施的操作性较强的程序规则则没有规定。这其中也包括了证据规则的欠缺。从宏观上来看,证据规则具有制约、引导诉讼程序推进的功能,也具有保障诉讼公正和诉讼效率的功能。因此,适当的证据规则也成为完善我国民事公益诉讼制度的重要内容之一。正是由于法官、当事人在民事公益诉讼中容易对证据的收集、审查判断和运用以及证明责任的负担等产生认识上的偏差,甚至因此而引发错判,所以我们有必要设置一套与民事公益诉讼相适应的证据规则对法官判断、确认证据的自由裁量权进行限制,对诉讼参加人提供证据、使用证据的权利加以保障,进而保障社会公益。从微观上来看,我国民事公益诉讼的特殊性要求特殊的证据规则为其“保驾护航”。通过分析不同种类且新型的公益诉讼案件表明,证据规则的多元功能变得日益重要。随着弱势群体的利益不断遭受侵害已导致一系列社会不稳定因素的产生。需要通过公益诉讼进行特殊保护,其中亦离不开证据规则的特殊保护,而我国现行民事公益诉讼的证据规则本身就存在立法不足,难以充分实现此类功能,因此,完善我国民事公益诉讼证据规则的立法迫在眉睫。如何从立法上完善我国民事公益诉讼的证据规则?在目标上,要完善我国民事公益诉讼的证据规则的立法,前提是要明确完善这种特殊诉讼类型的改革目标。基此,应当将准法定证明作为我国民事公益诉讼证据规则改革的方向。在方法上,要充分吸收和借鉴两大法系关于处理民事公益诉讼中的证据规则,如美国《联邦证据规则》中关于证据的关联性、专家证据制度等都是很好的借鉴。在内容上,要充分把握我国民事公益诉讼的特殊性,并且为其“量身订做”一套操作性强的证据规则：需要提高专家证据制度在我国民事公益诉讼中的角色定位；特殊的证明责任倒置规则、特殊的证据收集与证据保全制度并且对原告证明标准的有限降低等都是完善我国民事公益诉讼证据规则的重要组成部分。
[Abstract]:Although the civil procedure law revised in 2012 established the civil public interest litigation system, it has only one principle and rather vague provisions, and there are no provisions on the operational procedural rules to ensure its implementation. This also includes the lack of rules of evidence. From a macro point of view, the rules of evidence have the function of restricting and guiding the proceedings, and also have the function of ensuring the fairness and efficiency of litigation. Therefore, the appropriate rules of evidence has become one of the important contents of perfecting the civil public interest litigation system in our country. It is precisely because the judge, the parties in civil public interest litigation is easy to collect evidence, examine, judge and use, and the burden of proof, and so on, and even lead to misjudgment, so it is necessary for us to set up a set of evidence rules suitable for civil public interest litigation to limit the judge's judgment, confirm the discretion of evidence, and provide evidence to the litigants. The right to use evidence is guaranteed, and then the social public welfare is protected. From a micro point of view, the particularity of civil public interest litigation in our country requires special evidence rules to protect it. Through the analysis of different kinds and new public interest litigation cases, it is shown that the pluralistic function of evidence rules is becoming more and more important. With the continuous infringement of the interests of vulnerable groups has led to a series of social instability factors. It is necessary to carry out special protection through public interest litigation, among which the special protection of evidence rules can not be separated from the special protection of evidence rules. However, the current evidence rules of civil public interest litigation in our country have insufficient legislation, so it is difficult to fully realize this kind of function. Therefore, it is urgent to perfect the legislation of evidence rules of civil public interest litigation in our country. How to perfect the evidence rules of civil public interest litigation in our country from the legislation? In terms of goal, we should perfect the legislation of evidence rules of civil public interest litigation in our country, provided that we should make clear and perfect the reform goal of this kind of special litigation type. Therefore, quasi-legal proof should be regarded as the direction of the reform of evidence rules in civil public interest litigation in our country. In the method, we should fully absorb and draw lessons from the two legal systems on dealing with the evidence rules in civil public interest litigation, such as the relevance of evidence in the Federal evidence rules of the United States, the expert evidence system and so on. In terms of content, we should fully grasp the particularity of civil public interest litigation in our country, and "tailor-made" a set of operational evidence rules for it: it is necessary to improve the role of expert evidence system in civil public interest litigation in our country; The special rules of inversion of burden of proof, the special system of evidence collection and evidence preservation and the limited reduction of the standard of proof of plaintiffs are all important components of perfecting the rules of evidence of civil public interest litigation in our country.
【学位授予单位】：湖南师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】