刑事非法證據(jù)效力問(wèn)題研究
RESEARCH ON THE EFFECT OF ILLEGAL EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL

摘      要
刑事非法證據(jù)是否具有法律上的證據(jù)效力，在我國(guó)法學(xué)界一直爭(zhēng)論不休。這場(chǎng)爭(zhēng)論的中心議題是如何在法律上界定刑事非法證據(jù)的法律效力，進(jìn)而探討在我國(guó)建立什么樣的刑事非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則。1996年刑事訴訟法雖然對(duì)刑事非法證據(jù)的運(yùn)用作了相關(guān)的規(guī)定，在一定程度上能夠體現(xiàn)懲罰犯罪和保障人權(quán)相結(jié)合的訴訟目的。但從具體方面而言，卻存在著立法不完善、司法實(shí)踐中難以操作等若干問(wèn)題，歸根結(jié)底是因?yàn)槲覈?guó)對(duì)于刑事非法證據(jù)是否具有法律效力和具有什么樣的法律效力還存在爭(zhēng)論。本文嘗試對(duì)我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)及其效力的理論、立法以及司法實(shí)踐進(jìn)行研究，借鑒其他國(guó)家關(guān)于刑事非法證據(jù)的相關(guān)規(guī)定，從中國(guó)實(shí)際國(guó)情出發(fā)，對(duì)中國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)效力問(wèn)題進(jìn)行一個(gè)全面的剖析研究，力求促進(jìn)其完善。
文章首先對(duì)刑事非法證據(jù)及其效力的概念及其類型進(jìn)行了界定，接著綜合國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者的不同觀點(diǎn)對(duì)刑事非法證據(jù)的效力進(jìn)行理論分析，通過(guò)分型得出了采信說(shuō)、區(qū)別對(duì)待說(shuō)、去偽存真線索轉(zhuǎn)化說(shuō)、排除加例外說(shuō)、區(qū)別對(duì)待衡量轉(zhuǎn)化說(shuō)、排除說(shuō)等六種理論。在此基礎(chǔ)上通過(guò)介紹美、英、德、日四個(gè)個(gè)代表性國(guó)家及我國(guó)關(guān)于刑事非法證據(jù)效力的法律規(guī)定及司法實(shí)踐，進(jìn)而指出我國(guó)對(duì)這一問(wèn)題不同于國(guó)外的原因并且指出我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)制度的不足。最后針對(duì)我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)制度的不足，借鑒其他國(guó)家關(guān)于這一問(wèn)題的相關(guān)規(guī)定對(duì)規(guī)范我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)法律效力進(jìn)行法律構(gòu)建。筆者將從三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行：第一，完善立法機(jī)制。明確程序法定原則。第二，完善我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則的適用范圍。第三，建立一套符合我國(guó)國(guó)情的非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則配套機(jī)制。

關(guān)鍵詞：非法證據(jù)  法律效力 排除規(guī)則

Abstract
Whether evidence of criminal illegal evidence on the effectiveness of law in China has been in constant discussion in our jurisprudence. The central theme of this discussion is how to define in law the legal effect of the criminal illegal evidence, then what kind of establishment in our country's criminal illegal evidence exclusion rule. Although the Criminal Code of Criminal Procedure 1996, the use of illegal evidence made relevant provisions, to a certain extent, to reflect the punishment of crime and protection of human rights litigation purposes combined. However, in terms of specific aspects, but there is inadequate legislation, judicial practice, and so difficult to operate a number of issues, in the final analysis because of our evidence for criminal illegal validity of and what kind of legal effect is also in dispute. This article attempts to theories of criminal illegal evidence, legislation and judicial practice, research, learn from others on the relevant provisions of the criminal illegal evidence from China's actual national conditions, the evidence on the effectiveness of the Criminal illegal to conduct a comprehensive analysis of research, seeking to promote its perfect.
    The article first of the criminal illegal concept and types of evidence were defined, then the different views of foreign and domestic scholars, the evidence of the effectiveness of the criminal illegal theoretical analysis, by sub-type letters De Chu said in mining, different treatment that, eliminate the false and retain the true transformation that leads, add an exception rule that discrimination measure conversion, said that of six exclusion theory. On this basis, by introducing the United States, Britain, Germany, Japan and China in four countries were represented on the effect of illegal evidence in criminal law and judicial practice, then that is different from the foreign country on this issue of reason and pointed out that the Criminal Illegal insufficient evidence of the system. Finally, our system of criminal illegal evidence insufficient experience of other countries on this issue with the relevant provisions of the normative legal effect of evidence of criminal illegal legal construct. I would, from three aspects:  first, improve the legislative framework. Clear procedures for legal principles. Second, Improving the criminal illegal evidence exclusion rules application.Third, establish a consistent national condition of illegal evidence exclusion rule matching mechanism.

  Keywords:  Illegal evidence  The force of law  Exclusion

目      錄

第1章 緒論 1
1.1 問(wèn)題的提出 1
1.2 國(guó)內(nèi)外研究現(xiàn)狀 1
1.3 本文研究方法 1
第2章 刑事非法證據(jù)及其效力概述 3
2.1 刑事非法證據(jù)的概念及其分類 3
2.2 我國(guó)理論界關(guān)于非法證據(jù)效力的觀點(diǎn)及思考 3
第3章 中外關(guān)于非法證據(jù)效力的立法與實(shí)踐 7
3.1 美國(guó)對(duì)非法證據(jù)效力的立法與實(shí)踐 7
3.2 英國(guó)對(duì)非法證據(jù)效力的立法與實(shí)踐 7
3.3 德國(guó)對(duì)非法證據(jù)效力的立法與實(shí)踐 8
3.4 日本對(duì)非法證據(jù)效力的立法與實(shí)踐 10
3.5 我國(guó)對(duì)非法證據(jù)效力的立法與實(shí)踐 11
第4章 導(dǎo)致中外非法證據(jù)效力不同的因素 13
4.1 訴訟文化環(huán)境的不同 13
4.2 法律觀念的不同 14
4.3 刑事訴訟目的不同 14
4.4 現(xiàn)階段國(guó)內(nèi)刑事司法的現(xiàn)實(shí)與國(guó)際環(huán)境的不同 14
第5章 對(duì)規(guī)范我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)法律效力的構(gòu)想 16
5.1我國(guó)關(guān)于非法證據(jù)在立法上存在的問(wèn)題 16
5.1.1程序法定沒(méi)有得貫徹，立法有違程序法定原則 16
5.1.2 法律規(guī)定不全面、不徹底， 缺乏可操作性 16
5.1.3 缺乏配套的制度的支持 17
5.2 規(guī)范我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)法律效力的幾點(diǎn)構(gòu)想 18
5.2.1 完善立法機(jī)制，明確程序法定原則 18
5.2.2 完善我國(guó)刑事非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則的適用范圍 18
5.2.2.1 對(duì)非法言詞證據(jù)加以絕對(duì)排除 18
5.2.2.2 對(duì)非法實(shí)物證據(jù)原則上應(yīng)當(dāng)加以排除 19
5.2.3 建立一套符合我國(guó)國(guó)情的非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則配套機(jī)制 19
5.2.3.1 建立偵查司法審查機(jī)制 19
5.2.3.2 建立證據(jù)庭前審查機(jī)制 20
5.2.3.3 建立符合中國(guó)國(guó)情的沉默權(quán)制度 21
5.2.3.4 強(qiáng)化證人出庭作證制度 21
5.2.3.5 構(gòu)建完善的刑事非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則的舉證責(zé)任 23
5.2.3.6 建立對(duì)犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的雙重保障制度 23
5.2.3.7 完善對(duì)被侵權(quán)人的救濟(jì)機(jī)制 24
結(jié)論 25
致謝 26
參考文獻(xiàn) 27