论行政执法言词证据之刑事证据资格及转化适用  

On the criminal evidence qualification and transformation of verbal evidence in administrative law enforcement

作　　者：毛淑玲[1] 周好峰 Mao Shuling;Zhou Haofeng(School of Law,Liaoning Normal University,Dalian 116081,China)

机构地区：[1]辽宁师范大学法学院,辽宁大连116081

出　　处：《辽宁师范大学学报（社会科学版）》2021年第3期94-100,共7页Journal of Liaoning Normal University(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：辽宁省社会科学规划基金项目“新《民事证据规定》与《民法典》中证据规范的回应与对接问题研究”(L20BFX001);辽宁省教育厅人文社科基础项目“民事证据规则适用问题研究——以《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定(2019)》为中心”(WJ2020018)。

摘　　要：在赋予刑事证据资格的问题上,将行政执法中的言词证据与实物证据区别对待是不合理的。言词证据的不稳定性受心理学有关因素的影响,与取证主体、手段甚或证据种类的表述差异没有直接关系。行政执法言词证据在刑事司法中转化适用虽有一定风险,但阻止其转化适用的做法并非理性之举。消解对行政执法言词证据转化适用的忧虑需从行政执法程序入手。为提高行政执法取证能力,提升行政执法言词证据的可信性,可引入检察机关提前介入机制,并在立法上将录音录像措施的适用范围扩大至行政执法言词证据取证的全过程。On the issue of granting criminal evidence qualification,it is unreasonable to treat verbal evidence and physical evidence differently in administrative law enforcement.The instability of verbal evidence is affected by the relevant laws of psychology,and has no direct relationship with the differences in the presentation of the subjects,methods or types of evidence.Although there are certain risks in the transformation and application of administrative law enforcement verbal evidence in criminal justice,the method of preventing its transformation and application is not a rational move.To dispel the worry about the criminal evidence qualification of verbal evidence in administrative law enforcement,we should start with the administrative law enforcement procedure.In order to improve the ability of administrative law enforcement to obtain evidence and enhance the credibility of administrative law enforcement verbal evidence,the procuratorial organs can be introduced in advance to intervene in the mechanism,and the scope of application of audio and video measures can be extended to the entire process of administrative law enforcement verbal evidence.

关 键 词：言词证据 刑事证据资格 行政执法 监督 

分 类 号：D915.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]