法庭质证的内在结构与理论剖析——兼评“三项规程”的相关规定  

The Internal Structure and Theoretical Analysis of Court Examination——With Comments on the Relevant Provisions of the “Three Disciplines”

作　　者：李文军 LIWen-jun

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学人权研究院

出　　处：《北方法学》2018年第5期117-130,共14页Northern Legal Science

基　　金：中国博士后科学基金面上资助项目“庭审实质化改革认证规则体系研究”(2018M633624XB)的研究成果

摘　　要：法庭质证不仅是控辩双方反驳对方出示证据资料的重要手段，也是对裁判者心证施加影响的重要途径。法官在诉讼证明过程中的职能定位，决定其只能作为消极的听审主体而不是积极的质证主体。质证对象与证明对象不同，前者是证据资料，而后者是与犯罪有关的定罪量刑事实。免予质证证据与免证事实的区别在于，前者是无争议的证据、保密证据等，后者是具有高度可靠性的证据资料。虽然免予质证的证据资料不要求进行质证，但必要时仍可将部分证据资料纳入质证的客体范围。质证内容包括证据能力和证明力两方面。质证方法是指对与案件相关证据资料进行质疑或验证的途径。随着庭审实质化改革的继续推进和直接言词原则的贯彻，以人证调查为主线并穿插实物证据的调查方式，将取代以讯问被告人为中心的证据审核方式，形成以交叉询问和对质询问为主、职权询问为辅的混合式人证调查方法。The court examination is undoubtedly an important means for the accuser and the accused to refute and attack the other party＇s evidence and also an important way to influence judges. The function and status of the judges in the process of litigation determine that they should be a negative hearing subject rather than a positive subject. The subject matter is different from the proof object. The former refers to the evi- dence and the latter to the conviction and sentencing facts related to the crime. As for the distinction between questioning - free evidence and nontestimonial facts, the former is the undisputed evidence, confidential evidence, while the latter is a highly reliable evidence. Although the evidence of questioning - free evidence does not provide the court examination, it should be included in the scope of the cross -examina- tion in necessity. The scope of the contents of the examination evidence mainly refers to the evidence competence and sufficiency.

关 键 词：法庭质证 质证主体 质证对象 质证范畴 

分 类 号：DF71[政治法律—诉讼法学]