调取证据应该成为一项独立的侦查取证措施吗?——调取证据措施正当性批判  

Criticizing and questioning the legitimacy of evidence-obtaining measure

作　　者：艾明[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学刑侦学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《证据科学》2016年第2期155-166,共12页Evidence Science

基　　金：2014年国家社科基金重点项目"刑事诉讼法解释学的原理及运用研究"(项目编号:14AFX014)的阶段成果

摘　　要：我国侦查实践中的调取证据是一项独立的、具备干预性的强制处分措施。调取证据措施之所以具有上述性质,与侦查机关对《刑事诉讼法》的误读密切相关。这种误读违背体系解释,有违法明确性原则,不利证据排除。应将现有的调取证据措施整合进扣押措施,使之成为提出命令式的扣押,在此基础上,应进一步平衡查明事实和人权保障之间的关系,对扣押措施的运用做出相应的限制。Obtaining evidence is an independent, intrusive measure in Chinese investigation practice. It is relevant to the misreading of the Criminal Procedure Law by investigating authorities. This misreading is the breach of system interpretation, the principle of clear law and is unfavorable to the evidence exclusion. Obtaining evidence should be integrated into the seizing measure. And on this basis, the use of seizing measure should be appropriately limited by law.

关 键 词：调取证据 侦查取证 概括授权 特别授权 扣押 

分 类 号：D915.13[政治法律—诉讼法学]