“拒不认罪、从重处罚”的证据裁判主义审视  

Review of “no confession,heavier punishment”from the perspective of the principle of evidentiary adjudication

作　　者：封安波[1] 

机构地区：[1]河南师范大学法学院,河南新乡453007

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2017年第4期156-163,共8页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

摘　　要：在证据裁判主义的审视下,公诉人和审判人员对被告人"拒不认罪"表述的"从重处罚"之量刑意见,存在着两个"证据裁判悖论":一是它限制、剥夺了被告人的质证权利,二是它紊乱了公诉人、审判人员在证据裁判程序的角色;同时,对于被告人"拒不认罪"的各种情形,公诉人和法官皆有相应的控诉证据和裁判证据模式,即"庭前供述与其他证据相互印证"和(零口供)"其他证据的相互印证"两种(控诉或裁判)证据模式。对被告人"拒不认罪"进行"从重处罚"是不应当的,也没有必要。In the measurement of the principle of evidentiary adjudication,there are two＂evidentiary adjudication paradox＂in the sentencing opinion（ ＂no confession,heavier punishment＂） expressed by the public prosecutor and the judge;one,It limits,hit the cross-examination rights of the defendant; two,It disorders the role of the public prosecutor and the judge in evidentiary adjudication procedure. Meanwhile,in the case of the accused person who does not admit the offense,judges and prosecutors have corresponding referee evidence and charge evidence mode,these are two evidence（ prosecution or referee） models： ＂confession before the court and other evidence to confirm each other＂and（ zero confession） ＂other evidence to confirm each other＂. Heavier punishment to the defendant who does not plead guilty is inappropriate and unnecessary.

关 键 词：“拒不认罪、从重处罚” 证据裁判主义 证据裁判悖论 控诉证据模式 证据裁判模式 

分 类 号：DF713[政治法律—诉讼法学]