腐败犯罪瑕疵证据与非法证据的界分标准  

On Distinguishing Norms of Corruption Crime in Defective Evidence and Illegal Evidence

作　　者：曹红军[1] 王迎 

机构地区：[1]安徽大学法学院,安徽合肥230601 [2]招商银行淮南分行,安徽淮南232002

出　　处：《湖南科技大学学报（社会科学版）》2016年第1期60-64,共5页Journal of Hunan University of Science and Technology(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：安徽大学廉政法治协同创新中心2014年度研究生创新课题(ADLZFZ14YC01)

摘　　要：法治化反腐和冤假错案防范的有效实现,需要审判人员对腐败犯罪事实证据的精准审查。通过对腐败犯罪案件中瑕疵证据和非法证据的类型分析,提出"程序违法程度、证据的客观性和程序正义"作为腐败犯罪非法证据和瑕疵证据的界分标准。从而对非法言词证据、非法物证、书证以及瑕疵证据适用不同的排除规则,为有效实现法治化反腐的目标提供参考依据。In order to combat corruption by rule of law and prevent miscarriages of justice, it is required that the judges review the crime evidence of corruption precisely. Based on the analysis of the corruption crime types, this paper proposes the distinguishing norms of corruption crime in defective evidence and illegal evidence, i.e. ＂the degree of procedure violation, the objectivity of evidence and the procedural justice＂. Thus, the illegally testimonial evidence, the illegal material evidence, the illegal documentary evidence and the defective evidence is applicable to differently exclusionary rules, so as to provide references for effective realization of the goals of anti - corruption by rule of law.

关 键 词：腐败犯罪 瑕疵证据 非法证据 界分标准 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]