论大数据证据质证的形式化及其实质化路径  

On the Formalization of Cross-check of Big-data Evidences and the Path of Its Substantiation

作　　者：程龙[1] Cheng Long

机构地区：[1]云南大学法学院,昆明650500

出　　处：《复印报刊资料（诉讼法学、司法制度）》2022年第8期80-96,共17页

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“人工智能辅助量刑研究”(项目编号:20CFX004)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：如何确保大数据证据的质证活动不流于形式和空谈,成为司法实务中函须解决的关键问题。实践中,大数据证据直接运用偏少但采纳率高,基本上是对其衍生品具体结论的质证,预测性警务生成的大数据证据被用于定罪证明,质证与说理方式传统且单一。同时,大数据证据的直接运用存在“数据倾倒”的危险;而其间接运用则存在“黑箱效应”的困境。“间接质证”问题突出,司法审查中存在“数据独裁”与“证据偏在”倾向。这些质证形式化问题的形成,在刑事诉讼质证模式的传统分析维度上,主要与诉讼质证形式化、交又询问缺失以及庭前阅卷制度缺陷相关;在“大数据时代”刑事诉讼嬉变的现代分析维度上,主要与大数据时代司法裁判思维的变迁、大数据相关性论证取代因果性论证、对被追诉人数据权利保障不足、控辩平等严重失衡以及大数据的预测性警务运用与刑事法基本原则的抵触相关。未来须从被追诉人权利保障、裁判规则、质证思路等三个方面进行完善,以确保大数据证据质证的实质化。How to ensure that the cross-check of big-data evidences is not a mere formality and empty talk has become a key issue in urgent need of resolution in judicial practice.In practice,big-data evidences are seldom used in a direct way but enjoy a high rate of admission,with the cross-check of evidences being basically made regarding the the specific conclusion on its derivatives.The big-data evidences generated by predictive police affairs are used as proof for conviction,with cross-check of evidences and reasoning method being traditional and single.Meanwhile,the direct application of big-data evidences is in danger of"data dumping",and its indirect application involves a predicament of"black box effect".The problem of"indirect cross-check of evidences"is prominent,and there is a tendency of"data dictatorship"and"biased evidence"in judicial review.These problems in the formality of cross-check of evidences are mainly related to the formality of cross-check of evidences in litigation,the lack of cross-examination and the defects in the system of access to files prior to trial in the dimension of traditional analysis of the mode of cross-check of evidences in criminal proceedings.In the dimension of modern analysis of evolution of criminal proceedings in the"big-data era"',they are mainly associated with the change of judicial determination thinking in the big-data era,the substitution of causal argument by relevant argument for big-data,the insufficient protection of data rights of the accused,the serious imbalance of equality between the prosecution and the defense,and the conflict between the application of big-data for predictive police affairs and the basic principles of criminal law.In future,it is necessary to make improvement from three aspects such as the protection of rights of the accused,judging rules and ideas in cross-check of evidences,so as to ensure the substantiation of the cross-check of big data evidences.

关 键 词：大数据证据 质证 形式化 实质化 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]