论法院难以排除非法证据的深层次困境  

On the Deep Dilemmas for Courts to Difficultly Exclude Illegally Obtained Evidence

作　　者：王超[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学刑事法律科学研究院

出　　处：《社会科学》2013年第7期103-111,共9页Journal of Social Sciences

基　　金：2012年度教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目"刑事程序违法的定量分析"(项目编号:12YJA820069)的阶段性研究成果

摘　　要：尽管我国非法证据排除规则在技术上日臻完善,但是影响其贯彻落实的运行环境并未发生根本改变。就刑事庭审的功能而言,我们很难为非法证据排除规则找到用武之地。一方面,我国独有的公检法关系以及以审前程序为重心的刑事诉讼结构从根本上决定了辩护方很难通过申请排除非法证据来彻底颠覆检察机关的指控。即使辩护方偶尔通过强有力的证据促使法院排除非法证据,也难以改变被告人最终被定罪的命运。另一方面,在法庭调查流于形式而且审理与裁判相分离的情况下,再加上刑事审判对事实真相的过度追求,被寄予厚望的非法证据排除规则仍然有可能像以往那样,再次无法逃脱名存实亡的尴尬境地。Although Chinese exclusionary rule is improving daily in technology, the operating environment that will affect its implementation still doesn＇t change radically. With respect to the function of criminal court hearing, it is difficult for us to find ample scope for the exclusionary rule. On one hand, the particular mutual coordination among investigators, procuratorates and courts in China, and the criminal procedure structure centered on the pretrial procedure basically determine that it is difficult for the defense party to completely overthrow the procuratorate＇s prosecution through applying for excluding illegally obtained evidence. Even if the defense party can occasionally impel the court to exclude illegally obtained evidence by forceful evidence, the defendant fails to change the result of being convicted. On the other hand, in the case of a formalistic court investigation and the phase separation between hearing and adjudicating, coupled with excessive emphasis on the truth of a case fact, the exclusionary rule with the high expectations of the whole society would still exist in name only as before.

关 键 词：非法证据排除规则 适用困境 流于形式的审判 

分 类 号：D915.13[政治法律—诉讼法学]