德国刑事证据禁止利益权衡理论的演进及其借鉴  

The Evolution and the Reference Value of the Interests Weighing Theory in the German Criminal Evidence Prohibition

作　　者：王颖[1] Wang Ying

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2021年第4期132-147,共16页Global Law Review

摘　　要：德国历经百年确立了体系化的刑事证据禁止理论,其中利益权衡理论在学理与判例的共同推进中逐渐确立通说地位。利益权衡理论以取证程序违法与法律后果为核心内容,实体层面以程序违法程度及犯罪严重程度为核心权衡因素;法律后果层面,存在证据使用、证据禁止及第三范式的后果。在职权主义诉讼模式背景下,我国非法证据排除规则的完善应秉承以理论推动立法与司法的思路,构建"行为不法—结果不法—惩罚必要性/责任"递进式非法证据排除判定之逻辑进路,以教义学理论推进证据排除的体系化建构,并为实务中裁量排除提供理论支撑。同时,应确立裁量排除的原则与规则,加强法官自由裁量权与判例的引导地位。After a hundred years of exploration, Germany has established a systematic criminal evidence prohibition theory, in which the interest weighing theory has obtained a dominate status in the mutual advancement of dogmatic theories and precedents. The interests weighing theory takes the illegality of the evidence collection procedure and its legal consequences as its core contents. The degree of procedural violation and the severity of the crime are the core weighing factors at the substantive level;at the legal consequence level, there are three different consequences: use of evidence, prohibition of evidence and the third paradigm. Under the inquisitorial system, China should improve the exclusionary rules of illegal evidence based on the idea of promoting the legislation and administration of justice with theory, adopt progressive logic approach of "act illegality-consequence illegality-punishment necessity/responsibility" to the exclusion of illegal evidence, promote the systematic construction of evidence exclusionary rules through dogmatic theory, and provide theoretical support for discretionary exclusion in judicial practice. Meanwhile, the principles and rules of discretionary exclusion should be established, and the leading position of discretion of judges and precedents should be strengthened.

关 键 词：证据禁止 利益权衡 裁量排除 法定排除 

分 类 号：D951.6[政治法律—法学] DD914