论书面侦查说明的形式审查规则——在程序性裁判视野下的探讨  

The Review Rule on the Forms of Written Criminal Investigative

作　　者：郭晶[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院

出　　处：《犯罪研究》2014年第2期2-8,共7页Chinese Criminology Review

摘　　要：2013年《刑事诉讼法》及相关解释所构建的以非法证据排除和瑕疵证据补正为核心的程序性裁判,为侦查机关出具书面说明材料的适用设定了较大空间,悖离直接言辞原则,存在明显的正当性瑕疵。但侦查说明的适用,又在我国司法实践中具有一定的必要性与合理性,两种理念存在激烈的矛盾。就此,有必要根据程序性裁判的不同证明方式,试求形成侦查说明从底限规范性到精密规范性的多层级规范性阶梯,进而确立其审查与排除规则。借此,以精密的形式性规则,弥补侦查说明的公正性瑕疵,弥合其理论正当性与实践合理性之间的鸿沟。Established by Chinese 2013-year criminal procedural law,Procedural hearing,aimed at illegal evidence exclusion and evidence flaw correction,leaves a huge space for the using of written criminal investigative description,as is against the principle of the direct words,and of obvious fairness defects.Conversely,the written criminal investigative description is relatively necessary and reasonable in Chinese criminal judicial practice.There is truly a fierce conflict between two ideas mentioned above.In this issue,compatible with the different proof methods of procedural hearing,it is necessary to construct multiply normative levels of written criminal investigative description,range from bottom-line norm to sophisticated norm.In this way,the fairness defect of written criminal investigative description can be fixed.meanwhile,the contrast between theoretical fairness and practical rationality can also be reconciled.

关 键 词：侦查说明 程序性裁判 证明方式 形式要求 自由证明 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]