我国公文书证据规则的体系与结构  

The System and Structure of the Rules of Evidence in China's Official Documents

作　　者：纪格非[1] Ji Gefei

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院,北京100088

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2024年第4期189-200,F0003,共13页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：国家社科基金重点项目(20AZD118)“以人民为中心的民事司法程序前沿问题研究”。

摘　　要：公文书的证据规则不是简单的证据法问题。因涉及司法机关如何使用公主体的工作成果,公文书的证据规则与行政行为的效力规则存在表里关系,法官的自由心证及当事人争议公文书的权利受到一定限制。我国目前的公文书证据规则存在着内部体系混乱,逻辑不清,过度依赖“事实发现”路径的问题;在外部体系上,现有证据规则的效力未与行政行为的效力保持一致。为解决上述问题,应在法秩序统一的背景下对公文书的实质证明力作出更细致的区分,使公文书的证据规则与行政行为的效力相匹配。为实现公文书证据规则的体系化,还应区分三种不同类型的公文书,分别规定实质证明力的认定规范。The evidentiary rules for official documents are not simply a matter of evidence law.As they involve how judicial organs use the work products of public entities,the evidentiary rules for official documents have an intrinsic relationship with the rules of effectiveness of administrative acts,and the judge's free evaluation of evidence and the parties' right to dispute official documents are subject to certain restrictions.China's current evidentiary rules for official documents suffer from internal systemic confusion,lack of logic,and excessive reliance on the“ fact-finding” approach,and in the external system,the current norms are not coordinated with the effectiveness of administrative acts.To solve the above problems,a more detailed distinction should be made on the substantive probative value of official documents in the context of the unity of the legal order,so that the evidentiary rules for official documents match the effectiveness of administrative acts.To systematize the evidentiary rules for official documents,a distinction should also be made between three different types of official documents,with respective norms for determining substantive probative value.

关 键 词：公文书 实质证明力 形式证明力 推定 免证事实 

分 类 号：D915.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]