检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:张青[1] 刘一凤 ZHANG Qing;LIU Yifeng
出 处:《思想战线》2023年第4期142-151,共10页Thinking
基 金:国家社会科学基金项目“网络恐怖主义犯罪与中国体系化的法律应对研究”阶段性成果(18BFX092)。
摘 要:特别没收程序证明标准之体系化,有诉讼认识的阶段性、诉讼构造的对抗性以及实质正当法律程序上的根基。其体系结构由纵向诉讼流程上的递进式证明标准体系与横向诉讼构造上的多元化证明标准体系两个基本维度构成。囿于规范上的局限和理论上的误区,我国现行特别没收程序的证明标准设置,于纵向和横向维度上的体系结构均显不足。不仅各阶段证据标准不明,诉讼两造的证据负担也未见厘清,从而造成实务运作上弊病丛生,并有招致司法权力滥用之虞。未来对于特别没收程序证明标准的具体设置,应依诉讼阶段与争讼各方的特性、需求不同,而为不同程度、不同层次的体系化安排。The systematization of the proof standards of special confiscation procedure has its basis in the periodic nature of litigation,in the contentiousness of litigation,and in the propriety of legal process.Structurally it consists of two dimensions:the progressive proof standard system in the vertical litigation procedure and the multiple proof standard system in the horizontal litigation procedure.Due to limitations of standards and theoretical misconceptions,China's current proof standard system for special confiscation procedure shows an insufficiency in both the vertical and horizontal dimensions.Not only is the standard of evidence unclear in each stage,but also the burden of evidence for each party of the litigation remains unclear,resulting in numerous defects in practice and the possible abuse of judicial power.In the future,the proof standards for special confiscation procedure should be set systematically in different degrees and at different levels in accordance with the different attributes and needs of litigation stages and the parties involved in the litigation.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.49