民事诉讼中证人出庭作证若干问题研究

【作者】 孙同占；

【导师】 姜建初；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2002， 硕士

【摘要】 目前，我国尚未制定证据法，有关民事诉讼中证人出庭作证的法律规定过于原则、粗浅，导致司法实务中证人不愿出庭，不敢出庭，拒绝出庭的现象十分普遍。证人不出庭作证使当事人无法对证人证言进行质证，法官不能在庭上接触证人，从而使当事人的质证、辩证权受到限制和削弱，最终直接影响了民事诉讼的公正和效率，妨碍了民事诉讼程序的顺利进行和民事审判方式改革的进程，损害了法律的权威。因此，研究解决证人出庭作证问题，确保无法定事由的证人按时出庭作证已成为当务之急。本文分四个部分对证人出庭作证问题进行了探讨：第一部分，证人资格和范围；第二部分，建立和完善证人出庭作证制度的措施；第三部分，证人证言的运用原则；第四部分，证人的权利保护。 研究证人出庭作证问题，必须首先解决证人资格问题。在西方国家，无论是大陆法系或是英美法系都对证人资格进行了详细的规定。与西方国家相比，我国法律对证人资 格的规定则过于简单，可操作性不强。为此，笔者就单位 能否作证人；生理上、精神上有缺陷的人能否作证人；未 成年人能否作证人等问题进行了深入探讨，并基于现有的 法律规定，对我国证人的性质提出了自己的观点，认为我 国证人既是当事人的证人，又是法院的证人。 证人不出庭作证的最主要原因是制度的不完善。为建 立和完善证人出庭作证制度，笔者在论文第二部分对各国 立法例进行了比较分析，并结合我国实际提出六点具体措 施。一是建立强制证人出庭作证制度。有义务作证的人，如 果拒绝出庭作证，将受到法律的惩罚。二是建立特定证人 可不出庭作证制度。当证人具备法律规定的条件时，允许 其不出庭作证。三是设立证人宣誓制度。具体誓词是“我， 某某，面对法庭，将作真实的陈述，如作虚假陈述，愿意 承担罚款、拘留等一切法律责任／’四是确立交叉询问制度。 对主询问和反询问的方式作出明确规定，以确保通过交叉 询问，全面客观地查明案件事实，作出公正裁判。五是建 立隔离询问制度，当证人为数人时，对证人分别询问，尚 未询问和已经询问的证人不得在场。六是建立伪证惩戒制 度，对作伪证的证人予以惩处。 证人出庭作证的另一个重要问题是证人证言的运用问 一2 一 2 题。证人证言的运用应当遵循一定的原则，我国法律规定 了重证据、重调查研究，一切证据必须经查证属实才能作 为认定事实的根据等原则，笔者认为，除以上原则外，还 应借鉴国外的立法经验，将直接言词原则、传闻规则和意 见证据排除规则规定为证人证言的运用原则，论文第三部 分重点对此进行了论述。首先介绍了直接言词原则的涵义， 国外关于直接言词原则的立法规定及贯彻直接言词原则的 例外情况。在此基础上，对我国立法上的矛盾及贯彻直接 言词原则的必要性进行了剖析，对涉及直接言词原则应注 意解决的问题进行了阐述。其次介绍了传闻规则的概念、表 现形式，两大法系对传闻规则的不同认识及英美法系国家 关于传闻规则的例外规定，对我国采用这一规则应重点把 握的几个方面问题进行了深入讨论。第三，介绍了意见证 据排除规则的涵义、意见证据被排除的理由，我国关于意 见证据排除规则的规定，以及意见证据排除规则例外情况 的设置原则等。 证人出庭作证制度作为诉讼法律制度的一种，应当是 权利和义务的统一体。民事证据立法在强调证人作证义务 的同时，亦应当规定严密的证人权利体系，对证人的合法 权益给予切实的保护。证人的权利是多方面的，论文第四 一3 一 Z 部分重点对证人的经济求偿权、证人及其近亲属的法律保 护、证言拒绝权进行了阐述。为提高对证人权利的保护意 识，笔者用大量篇幅介绍了国外立法的成功经验，对学术 界的不同观点进行分析，对如何保障证人切实享受到上述 权利提出了若干立法建议。如，关于对证人及其近亲属的 法律保护，笔者提出三点立法建议：第一，引入事前保护 制度，健全各种预防性保护措施；第二，修改刑法，加大 对侵害证人合法权益行为的打击力度；第三，对因读职未 对证人及其近亲属给以有效保护的司法人员予以惩处。 本文的宗旨是：立足于司法实践，用民事诉讼理论，对 与证人出庭作证制度有关的证人资格和范围，证人出庭作 证制度的建立和?更多还原

【Abstract】 At present, the legal provisions about the testification of witness at court in civil actions are so principled and superficial that which lead to the popularity that the witness is unwilling to, dare not and refuse to appear to be the witness at court in the judicial business because the evidence act has not been formulated. If the witness does not appear to testify, the litigant is unable to cross ?examine the oral evidence of the witness, the judge can not get in touch with the witness at court, so the litigant’s rights of the cross ?examination and defense are limited and reduced, as eventually influence the justice and efficiency of the judicial business, stand in the way of the progress of the judicial business procedure and the process of the innovation of the way of civil trial, do harm to the authority of the law. Therefore, it is very necessary to study and solve the problem that the witness appears at court to testify and to make sure of the witness who cannot decide the reasons bear witness in court. I research in this thesis in the problem of how the witness appears at court to testify. This thesis is divided into four parts : the qualification and range of the witness in Part One; the measures how to establish and perfect the rules that witness appears at court to testify in Part Two; the principle how to put to use the oral evidence of the witness in Part Three; how to protect the witness’s right in Part four.If we want to study the problem how the witness appears to the court to testify, we must above all solve the problem of the qualification of the witness. The qualification of the witness has been regulated in details in whether the Continental law system or the Britain and American law system in the western countries. Compared with the western countries, the law regulations in our country about the qualification of the witness are too simple to operate. So I do deep research in the problems whether an organization or the disabled persons physiologically and spiritually or the minors can testify and put forward personal opinion about the nature of the witness in our country who is both the litigant’s witness and the court’s witness on the basis of the law regulations at present.The major reason why the witness will not appears at court to testify is the imperfect systems. I compare and study the. legislative examples of all the countries, put forward six specific measures according to the reality of our country in Part Two. First, to establish the system that the witness must be forced to appear at court to testify. Those who have duties to appear at court to testify refuse to appear must be punished by law. Second, to establish the system the specific witness may not appear at court to testify. When the witness is qualified for the membership law permitted, he is permitted not to appear at court to testify. Third, to establish the system the witness takes an oath. The concrete oath is " I, so-and-so, now stand at court, will give true statement, or I am willing to bear all the legal responsibilities, suchas to be fined, to be held in custody etc. Fourth, to assure the system of cross ?examination. We must make definite regulations about the ways of principal inquiry and cross ?examination, make sure that we can find out the case fact in an all ?round and object way and judge fairly by cross梕xamination. Fifth, to establish the isolated confinement system. When there are several witnesses , we should inquire them separately without the other witnesses who have been or will be inquired at present. Sixth, to establish the system the crime of giving false evidence must be punished. Those who make the crime of perjury should be punished.Anther major problem how the witness appears at court to testify is how to use his or her oral evidence. How to use the witness’s oral evidence must comply with some principles. There are some legal principles in our country, such as to emphasize the evidence, to emphasize investigation and study, all the evidences must be proved true before the更多还原