当事人询问程序规范化研究——以《新证据规定》第六十四条为中心  

On Standardization of Litigant Inquiry Procedure--Centering on Article 64 of the New Provisions of Evidence

作　　者：伊舟 Yi Zhou(Law School,Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《河南财经政法大学学报》2021年第1期137-147,共11页Journal of Henan University of Economics and Law

摘　　要：受职权主义诉讼模式的长期影响,我国当事人询问缺乏程序法上的规范和约束,实践中询问随意性较大,既不利于当事人陈述独立证据价值的发挥,也不利于法官中立性的维持。当事人询问规范化运行的讨论应建立在辩论主义的前提上。当事人询问是关系着法官正当履职以及当事人程序保障的裁量选择行为,在讨论当事人询问程序时要对发现真实、促进诉讼、谨慎裁判三者进行全面考量,避免法官中立性的丧失。所谓“人民法院认为有必要”,应当从当事人询问之基本原则、缓和路径、限制性规定三方面进行分析,并建立以“补充性为原则,法定特殊情形为例外,引起法官合理怀疑为限制”的当事人询问制度。Due to the long-term effects of Inquisitorial System,the litigant inquiry in our country is lack of procedural rules and constraints.In practice,the inquiry system is operated with great arbitrariness,which is not conducive to the development of the independent evidence-value of litigant statement,nor to the maintenance of the neutrality of the judge.The discussion of the litigant inquiry should be based on the adversary doctrine.The litigant inquiry is a discretionary act of choice,which is related to the proper execution of duty by judges and the procedural guarantee of litigants.When determining the procedure of the litigant inquiry,we need to focus on the balance among truth discovering,procedure promotion and cautious judgement,and avoid the loss of the neutrality of the judge.The “necessity of inquiry” should be divided into three parts:the basic principle,the mitigation path and the restrictive provisions of litigant inquiry,and we need to establish a litigant inquiry system,which takes complementary as basic principle,statutory special cases as exception and reasonable suspicion as restriction regulation.

关 键 词：当事人询问 当事人陈述 法官裁量 补充性原则 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]