证据评价的自由与规范法理  

The Normative Jurisprudence and Freedom of Evidence Evaluation

作　　者：熊晓彪 XIONG Xiaobiao

机构地区：[1]中山大学法学院

出　　处：《中国政法大学学报》2023年第4期225-241,共17页Journal Of CUPL

基　　金：证据科学教育部重点实验室(中国政法大学)开放基金资助课题“证据评价AI模型研究”(项目编号:2022KFKT08)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：证据评价的自由俨然已经成为现代社会开明司法之基石,但中国立法与司法实践却表现出一种对“法定证据”异乎寻常的青睐。建立在“自然理性”回归与“法定证据”反思基础之上的“自由心证”,实际上至少受到法律的三重干预。对“法定证据”的片面理解与认识误区,致使理论上的“证据自由评价”与“新法定化”实践趋向之间存在一道鸿沟。现代立法者逐渐意识到,对裁判者评价证据的自由予以适度的指导与规制是有益的。这不仅出于认识论上的理由,而且还因为可以有效防止自由擅断与确保程序正义。裁判责任与行为的道德哲学要求、“自由心证”困境以及规范的指导与约束功能,分别从内外两个层面证成了证据评价规范设立的正当性。基于规范理论与国外证据评价控制举措,结合中国具体司法实践,能够构建证据评价的“指引、要求、规则”三层次规范体系。这一规范体系为中国当下的“证据评价法定化”司法实践提供了理论基础与矫正框架。The freedom of evidence evaluation seems to have become a cornerstone of enlightened justice in modern society,but China's legislation and judicial practice have shown an unusual preference towards the legal proof.The free proof that based on the regression of natural rationality and the reflection of legal proof,in fact,is at least threefold intervened by law.The unilateral cognition and misunderstanding of the legal proof lead to a significant gap between theoretical freedom of evaluation of evidence and the practical trend of new legalism.Modern lawmakers are generally realizing that some reasonable guidance and regulation on the adjudicators'freedom to evaluate evidence is beneficial.It is not only due to cognitive reasons,but also as safeguards against arbitrariness and as guarantors of procedure justice.The judgment responsibility and action of moral philosophy requirements,the dilemmas and challenges faced by the freedom of proof,and the guiding and constrain functions of norms,can justify the legitimacy of the evidence evaluation norms from both internal and external levels.Based on the exploration of the normative theories and the control measures about evidence evaluation at home and abroad,a three-level normative system with different degrees of interference in inner conviction is constructed and formed.This system provides a theoretical foundation and basic framework for the judicial practices of legalizing fact-finding in China.

关 键 词：证据评价 自由心证 法定证据 规范的正当性 三层次规范体系 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]