民事诉讼中书面证言的效力探析  

Effectiveness of written testimony in civil proceedings

作　　者：占善刚[1] 王超[1] ZHAN Shangang;WANG Chao(School of Law, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, Chin)

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院,湖北武汉430072

出　　处：《中南大学学报（社会科学版）》2018年第2期80-86,共7页Journal of Central South University：Social Sciences

基　　金：2017年国家社会科学基金一般项目"审判程序违法的类型化处理研究"(17BFX053);2017年最高人民检察院检察理论研究重点课题"刑事案件中电子证据的审查判断"(GJ2017B11);2013年教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目"证人;鉴定人出庭作证费用补偿制度研究"(13YJA820063);国家2011计划司法文明协同创新中心研究成果

摘　　要：证人证言的实质是对事实的证明建立在证人的感知之上,证人对感知的记忆是证言的基础。在民事诉讼中,为因应民事诉讼的言词、直接原则,保障当事人的证据调查参与权,证人应于审判法庭前口头陈述其所体验的事件始末,并接受当事人的询问与质疑,书面证言非有法律的例外规定不可使用。从自身特点来看,书面证言在用文字记录和固定证人证言的同时,省略了证人作证时丰富的背景材料、肢体动作及表情语言,有扭曲证人真意之虞。就证据属性而言,书面证言带有先天性的缺陷,可信度不足,但具备特定情形下的可用性。依证据法理,有正当理由不能出庭与可以通过书面证言的方式作证并不具备必然的因果关系,《民事诉讼法》第73条关于使用书面证言的规定有失妥当。书面证言作为证人证言的替代品,立法上应当对其证据能力规则进行重塑,司法实践中应当通过提高其可信度以增强证明力。In civil proceedings, the essence of witness testimony is the proof of the facts based on the perception of witnesses. According to the principle of directness and verbalism, witness, in the court, should state the truth which he experienced. Written testimony omits rich background material, body movements and language of facial expression when recording and fixing witness＇ words. Therefore, written testimony has a congenital defect, only with the admissibility in the specific circumstances. Article 73 of The Civil Procedure Law concerning written testimony is inappropriate. Having a proper reason for not appearing in court does not necessarily lead to written testimony with evidence capacity. Written testimony is a substitute for witness testimony. Evidence weight and evidence capacity of written testimony should be reevaluated in legislation.

关 键 词：言词原则 直接原则 书面证言 证据能力 证明力 

分 类 号：D915.13[政治法律—诉讼法学]