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:刘金松 Liu Jinsong
机构地区:[1]重庆大学法学院
出 处:《中外法学》2025年第2期421-439,共19页Peking University Law Journal
基 金:国家社科基金后期资助项目“我国刑事司法多元模式及其现代化转型研究”(项目编号:24FFXB079);中国博士后科学基金第76批面上资助(项目编号:2024M763852)阶段性研究成果。
摘 要:以诉讼阶段论为底色的纵向诉讼构造塑造了我国刑事证据审查制度的基本结构,以其为基础可以归纳出“证据层控主义”这一体系化的证据法理念。相较于以审判为中心的证据审查体系,证据层控主义试图依托层层把关式的证据审查机制确保事实认定质量。证据层控主义具备多中心的层控格局、扁平化的层控方式以及外部化的层控标准等特征。对代表合法性知识的非法证据、代表专门性知识的专家证据和代表混合性知识的证明标准的层层审查是证据层控主义的典型实践样态。证据层控主义在约束事实认定者滥用权力等方面起到重要作用,但却造成证据法概念的意义泛化、证据审查的机械化、查明真相的逻辑和司法证明的逻辑混同、对抗事实认定风险的证据性权利缺失等问题。证据层控主义为推进以审判为中心的刑事证据制度变革,提供了一个可供对话和批判的靶子。The vertically structured litigation model,characterized by a litigation-stage-based approach,has shaped the fundamental framework of China's criminal evidence review system.Based on this foundation,the concept of“layered control doctrine of evidence”can be systematically derived as a guiding principle in evidence law.Compared to a trial-centered evidence review system,the evidence-tiered control doctrine seeks to ensure the accuracy of fact-finding through a layered,checkpoint-based mechanism of evidence scrutiny.This doctrine exhibits several distinctive features,including a multi-centered tiered control structure,a flattened tiered control process,and externalized tiered control standards.Its typical application is seen in the multi-layered review of three categories of evidence:illegally obtained evidence,which represents legality-based knowledge;expert evidence,which represents specialized knowledge;and proof standards,which embody hybrid knowledge.While the evidence-tiered control doctrine plays a crucial role in restraining fact-finders from abusing their power,it also leads to several issues.These include the overgeneralization of evidentiary concepts,the mechanization of evidence review,the conflation of truth-finding logic with judicial proof logic,and the absence of evidentiary rights to counteract the risks inherent in fact-finding.Ultimately,this doctrine serves as both a subject of critique and a point of dialogue in advancing reforms aimed at establishing a criminal evidence system aligned with a trial-centered litigation framework.
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:216.73.216.38