【作者】 崔洁；

【导师】 陈光中；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 目前,我国学界对于刑事证据法的研究呈现一派繁荣景象,但对于刑事证据法目的之研究却基本属于空白。刑事证据法目的是刑事证据法学和刑事诉讼法学具有前提性的基础理论,它对于刑事证据法的理论研究和实践都意义重大。因此,本文试图对此重要而复杂的问题进行探索性的研究,期望能对我国刑事证据法制度的完善有所裨益。本文除导言外,共分六章,主要内容如下:第一章概论共分三部分,简要论述了本文一些基本的概念和理论。第一部分梳理了哲学和法律上的目的论发展,探寻了法律从维护法和平到个人利益到兼顾社会利益的目的历程,指出现代的法律目的应该具有主观性、客观性、指向性和合法性;第二部分将刑事证据法定义为法律规定的有关收集证据、审核证据和运用证据认定案件事实必须遵循的一系列具体准则,并具体区分了法律目的和法律价值、刑事法律目的和刑事法律价值之间的关系。法律目的和法律价值在评断标准层面具有相似性,但前者更主观,后者更客观,法律目的指向法律价值,法律价值是法律目的的评判标准。刑事证据法的目的意指对刑事证据法所具有的客观价值进行了主观选择,并以此作为制度设计优劣的判断依据。第三部分从历史的角度回顾了刑事证据法目的的演进,指出这一过程的主线围绕发现不同真实,强调发现真实的正当性而展开,中外皆然。在现代,两大法系的刑事证据法目的呈现多元化,其中发现真实、促进法治实现、提高诉讼效率和巩固社会伦理秩序这四个目的相对突出和重要。第二章论述了刑事证据法最古老最稳定的目的,即发现真实。在梳理了事实、真实、真理的若干理论以及关于能否发现真实,发现客观真实还是法律真实这些不同意见的基础上,文章认为,刑事证据法存在的基础就在于承认人们能够发现世界的陈述与事实间的匹配关系。在实践中,这意味着在对真实的坚守和妥协间寻找平衡。从具体的证据规则看,几乎所有的证据规则都和发现真实有关,但最为典型的还是刑事的证明标准和最佳证据规则,尽管其在两大法系的表现形态有所差异,但都指向发现真实。第三章论述了刑事证据法促进法治实现的目的。法治最核心的内涵是保障个人权利和自由、限制国家(政府)权力。在刑事证明过程中,公民的权利往往会受到国家合法抑或不合法的侵害。和放纵犯罪比,放纵国家权力显然危害更大。因此,刑事证据法格外注重维护法治,这一目的有时甚至能处于发现真实目的之上。目前大多数的刑事证据规则都吸收了该目的,其中突出的就是自白任意性规则和非法物证排除规则。然而,两大法系虽然都有这两项规则,但各国的侧重点也不尽相同,如英美法系的美国侧重于限制警察权力,大陆法系的德国更乐于保障公民个人权利。第四章论述了刑事证据法提高诉讼效率的目的。在司法资源稀缺的情形下,效率对于刑事证据法的正常运转以及公正的实现都有重大意义。提高效率主要依靠合理配置资源,以尽可能少的投入获得尽可能多的产出。在刑事证据法中,蕴含效率追求的法条数量也不少,大多集中在对证明进行简化。如“不需要证据的证明”,主要包括司法认知和对主张一方有利的事实的推定。这些规则的设计能够明显提高效率,但也有可能对发现真实造成一定损害。第五章论述了刑事证据法维护社会伦理秩序的目的。对伦理秩序的需求根源于人类的本性,在某种意义上它甚至是法律能够安身立命的根本,具有现代精神的刑事证据法,也必须有助于维护家庭伦理、社会信赖秩序等价值,即便对这些价值的维护与发现真相背道而驰。刑事证据法中集中反映这一目的的应该是证人拒绝作证特权规则,该规则在两大法系中均有体现,只是表现的范围和力度各不相同。第六章将研究的视角重新切回中国。中国目前的刑事证据规则在立法上还很落后,实践中也难当大任。造成这种现状的原因是多方面的,完善刑事证据规则也并非一朝一夕的事情,可以根据我国实际的政治、文化、经济因素和实践需求等现实情况,选择适合我国国情的目的,逐步完善我国的刑事证据法律。总之,无论偏好哪些刑事证据法目的,构建怎样的刑事证据规则,我们都要牢记一点,在我国未来的刑事证据法制建设中,不择手段发现真实从来都不应成为刑事证据法的目的。更多还原

【Abstract】 Now there is booming about Criminal Evidence Law research in Chinese legal academe. But there are few researches about the goals of Criminal Evidence Law. The goals of Criminal Evidence Law are the basic theory of Criminal Evidential Science of Law and Criminal Procedural Science of Law. It’s significant regarding the Criminal Evidence Law’s fundamental research and practice. Therefore, this article attempts to research this important and complex issue, expected that can have a benefit to our national research about Criminal Evidence Law.Besides the introduction, this article is divided into six chapters. The main contents are as follows.The first chapter is divided into three parts, briefly discussing some basic concepts and theories. The first part elaborated the development of Teleology on philosophy and legal area. It explored the history of the law from achieving legal peace into protecting personal interests and also protecting social interests. It pointed out that the target of modern law should have subjectivity, objectivity, directivity and legitimacy.The second part defined the Criminal Evidence Law as a series of specific criteria which should be followed when collecting evidence, examining evidences, and using evidences to decide the fact This part distinguished goals of law and values of law. And it also distinguished legal goals and legal values of the Criminal Evidence Law. The legal goals and legal values are similar at the level of judging standards. But the goals are more subjective while the values are more objective. The legal goals point to the value of legal values, while the Legal values are the measuring standard of legal goals. The goals of Criminal Evidence Law are choosing the objective values of Criminal Evidence Law and measuring the quality of designed legal system based on this chosen.The third part reviewed the evolution of goals of the Criminal Evidence Law. It pointed out the master line of this evolution was fact-finding legally both in China and foreign countries. In modern times, goals of the Two Main Legal Systems are diversified. And such four goals as fact-finding, rule of law, improving the lawsuit efficiency, and consolidating the ethics order, were relatively prominent and important.The second chapter elaborated the most ancient and stable goals, namely fact-finding. It elaborated different opinions on the fact, the truth, theories about the truth, whether the truth can be discovered, and whether the discovery is real truth or legal truth. Considering about these opinions, this article viewed that the foundation of Criminal Evidence Law was admitting people could find the matching relationship between the world’s statements and the fact. In practice, it means finding the balance between seeking the truth and compromise. Looking from the rules of evidence, nearly all the rules of evidence are related to fact-finding. The most typical one is the certificates rule and the best evidence rule of Criminal Evidence Law. Although they have different manifestations in the Two Main Legal Systems of Western Countries, they all point to fact-finding.The third chapter elaborated the goals of Criminal Evidence Law promoting realizing the rule of law. The core meaning of the law is protecting personal rights and freedoms restricted states or government’s power. In the criminal proof process, the rights of citizens are often aggrieved by government legally or not legally. Compared with personal criminals, the indulgence of government’s power is much more dangerous. Therefore, Criminal Evidence Law specially paid attention to maintaining the law. Sometimes this goal can be more preferential than discovering the truth. At present, most of criminal evidence rules already absorbed this goal, especially Free and Voluntary of Confession and Exclusionary Rule of Illegal Obtained Evidence. How ever, both of the Two Main Legal Systems have these two rules, but different countries put emphases on different points. Such as USA belonged to Anglo-American Law System emphasizes on limiting police’s power. Meanwhile, Germany belonged to Civil Law System emphasizes on protecting individual rights.The fourth chapter elaborated the goals of Criminal Evidence Law improving the lawsuit efficiency. Under the judicial resource scarcity, the efficiency has great significance on the criminal evidence Law’s normal operations and achieving justice. Improving efficiency depends on the rational allocation of resources in order to use the lowest inputs and get the biggest outputs. In the Criminal Evidence Law, many articles have the goals of improving the lawsuit efficiency. Most of them focused on the proof can be simplified, such as "proof without evidence". It mainly includes Judicial Notice and presumption which is beneficial to the claimer. These rules can improve the efficiency obviously, but maybe they will bring some damages for finding the truth.The fifth chapter elaborated the goals of Criminal Evidence Law consolidating the ethics and order. The demand for ethical order rooted in human nature. In a sense, it even is the fundamental of the law. The Criminal Evidence Law with modern spirit also should have these values such as maintaining the family ethics, social trust, fair benefits and so on. Even some times there will be conflicts between maintaining these values and finding the truth. In Criminal Evidence Law, this goal is indicated by the rule of Privilege of Refuse to Testify. This rule is embodied in the Two Main Legal Systems, but it has different performance and the scope.The sixth chapter goes back to view at China. The legislation of Criminal Evidence Rules in China gets behind. It also couldn’t contribute too much in practices. This result is made by many reasons. It’s not a short time to perfect the Criminal Evidence Law. Based on our national political, cultural, economic factors and practice requirements, we can choose the suitable contents to perfect our Criminal Evidence Law step by step.In brief, no matter what goals of Criminal Evidence Law are preferred, or what kind of Criminal Evidence Rules Standards are built, we need keep firmly in mind this point. In our country’s future Criminal Evidence Law construction, finding the truth without considering the methods shouldn’t be the goal of Criminal Evidence Law.更多还原