论可补救的排除规则  

On Remedial Exclusionary Rule

作　　者：李昌林[1] 王景龙[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学,重庆401120

出　　处：《现代法学》2013年第6期122-131,共10页Modern Law Science

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目"基层检察机关实施刑事诉讼法状况实证研究"(09XJA820012);西安财经学院2012年科研基金项目"契约文明下的协商型司法"(12XCK08)

摘　　要：中国证据排除规则宜称为"可补救的排除规则",补救与排除的对象包括瑕疵证据与非法证据。证据的补救方式包括补正、证据重作(重新取证)、补强或印证、合理解释等。非法证据和瑕疵证据都具有补救可能性,但两者在补救与排除的顺序、补救的侧重点以及难度方面存在较大差异。对于非法证据,应当贯彻先排除后补救的原则;对于有补救条件的,应当通过证据重作的方式补救其内容。对于瑕疵证据,则应当贯彻先补救后排除的原则,主要是采用补正、补强或印证、合理解释等方式,使其具有形式上的完整性和合法性;对于不能补救的,也应当予以排除。China＇ s exclusionary rule should be called remedial exclusionary rule, with defective evidence and illegal evidence as its object. The remedial method of illegal evidence includes correction of defective evidence, recollecting evidence, mutual verification or confirmation and reasonable explanation. There are possibilities of remedy for both illegal evidence and defective evidence, but there are significant differences in the priority of exclusion and remedy, the degree of difficulty, the remedial focus, etc. For illegal evidences, it should follow the principle that remedy comes after the exclusion. For those evidences which can be remedied, evidence recollection shall be employed. For defective evidences, it should follow the principle that remedy comes before exclusion with correction, verification or confirmation and reasonable explanation, which guaran- tees its integrity and legitimacy. Those cannot be remedied shall be excluded.

关 键 词：非法证据 瑕疵证据 证据的补正 证据的补救 

分 类 号：DF73[政治法律—诉讼法学]