论启动非法证据排除程序的“线索或者材料”——从“质疑责任说”到“审判对象具体化说”  

On the"Clues or Materials"for Initiating the Exclusion of Illegally Obtained Evidence:From the"Burden of Challenge Theory"to the"Concrete Object of Trial Theory"

作　　者：孙远 SUN Yuan(Law School,University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.Beijing 100102,China)

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院大学法学院,北京102488

出　　处：《法学论坛》2025年第1期16-26,共11页Legal Forum

基　　金：2018年度国家社科基金重大项目“中国特色刑事证据理论体系研究”(18ZDA139)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：在非法证据排除程序之启动条件问题上,“质疑责任说”将导致控方不得不对证据合法性承担无法完成的“全面证明责任”,且使得非法证据排除变成一个极易被滥用的程序。若采此说,不仅无助于保障程序公正,反倒会造成法庭对证据合法性调查的形式化。因此,对于《刑事诉讼法》第58条第2款规定的“线索或者材料”的解释,应采用“审判对象具体化说”。一方面,当事人申请排除非法证据之请求的事实基础应当具有特定性;另一方面,该特定性事实须有一定证据做支撑。现行法关于非法证据排除程序启动之证明标准的规定,在很大程度上是与我国高度封闭的侦查模式相适应的,随着侦查模式的转变,该标准亦有调整的可能性。Regarding the conditions for initiating the procedure of excluding illegally obtained evidence, the "Burden of Challenge Theory" forces the prosecution to bear an unattainable "comprehensive burden of proof" regarding the legality of evidence. This would turn the exclusion of illegal evidence into a procedure that is easily abused. Adopting this approach would not contribute to ensuring procedural fairness, but instead, it would lead to the formalization of the court's investigation into the legality of evidence. Therefore, the interpretation of "clues or materials" in paragraph 2 of Article 58 of the Criminal Procedure Law should adopt the "Concrete Object of Trial Theory." On the one hand, the factual basis of the defendant's request for the exclusion of illegal evidence should be specific, and on the other hand, this specificity should be supported by certain evidence. The current legal standards for initiating the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence largely align with China's highly closed investigation model. As the investigation model evolves, these standards may also need to be adjusted.

关 键 词：非法证据排除 侦查模式 证明标准 审判对象 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]