静水深流:我国民事证据制度朝“自由心证”的悄然迈进  

Quiet Moves of China's Civil Evidence System Towards“Free Evidence Evaluation”

作　　者：胡学军 Hu Xuejun

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学法律学院

出　　处：《南大法学》2021年第1期1-16,共16页NanJing University Law Journal

基　　金：2020年国家社科基金一般项目“比较法视野下民事证据制度本土化研究”(编号20BFX094)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：我国证据制度在定位上长期徘徊于“法定证据”与“自由心证”之间,近年来兴起“印证证明模式”与“新法定证据主义”之争。《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》(简称《证据规定》)之“证据审核认定”部分的修订并未动摇其原有模式与框架。从《证据规定》第96条管窥,其规范本身合理性存在一定问题,司法实践中也并未真正依据该条文所列因素审核证人证言可信性。司法解释中此类条文最好视为对法官自由判断“赋权”的宣示性规范,而非“限权”的强制性规范。在新一轮司法改革背景下,我国民事证据制度正在向自由心证悄然迈进。The positioning of the evidence system in China has been hovering between“statutory evidenceism”and“free evidence evaluation system”for a long time.In recent years,there has been a dispute between“confirmed proof mode”and“new legal evidenceism”.The revision of the“Evidence Review and Confirmation”part of the Evidence Regulations has not shaken its original model and framework.From the perspective of Article 96 of the Evidence Regulations,there are certain problems with the rationality of the regulations themselves.In judicial practice,the credibility of witness testimony has not been verified based on the factors listed in this article.Such provisions in judicial interpretations should be best regarded as declarative norms for judges to freely judge“empowerment”rather than mandatory norms for“restriction of powers”.In the context of the new round of judicial reform,China's civil evidence system is quietly approaching free evidence evaluation system.

关 键 词：民事证据制度 印证证明 法定证据主义 自由心证 证人证言审核 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]