論我國傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則的構(gòu)建
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-29 18:19
【摘要】：傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則誕生于英美法系國家,是英美法系證據(jù)法中最古老、最具特色的證據(jù)規(guī)則之一。在我國刑事案件中,證人證言是一項(xiàng)非常重要的證據(jù),《刑事訴訟法》第59條當(dāng)中明確規(guī)定了證人證言必須經(jīng)過當(dāng)庭的質(zhì)證,查證屬實(shí)后才可以作為定案依據(jù),然而在司法實(shí)踐中的普通現(xiàn)象則是證人出庭率低,大量書面證言進(jìn)入法庭,法官通過閱讀各種書面證人證言來作為定案的依據(jù),顯然司法實(shí)踐中并沒有很好的履行法條中的規(guī)定。我國在2013年新刑事訴訟法當(dāng)中對(duì)于證人出庭作證方面取得了許多新的突破,試圖完善證人出庭的相關(guān)制度,來提高證人出庭率,然而在條件完善的情況下,對(duì)于規(guī)則適用同樣不能夠退卻,新刑訴法當(dāng)中確立非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則,是我國關(guān)于證據(jù)規(guī)則一項(xiàng)里程碑式的突破,在證據(jù)可采性方面起了一個(gè)好頭,對(duì)于同樣重要的傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則而言,確立傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則有利于法庭獲取最佳證據(jù),保障被告人的質(zhì)證權(quán),有利于作出公正的審判,因此結(jié)合我國實(shí)際情況,構(gòu)建傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則意義非常重大。本文將從四個(gè)方面對(duì)傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則進(jìn)行分析。 第一章,主要針對(duì)傳聞證據(jù)與傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則的基本概念進(jìn)行概述,同時(shí)與他們相似的概念傳來證據(jù)與直接言詞原則進(jìn)行一下比較分析,可以更清晰的明確傳聞證據(jù)的概念及其特點(diǎn)。 第二章,分析了我國傳聞證據(jù)相關(guān)的立法情況,同時(shí)列舉了13起經(jīng)典司法錯(cuò)案,總結(jié)歸納了傳聞證據(jù)在我國司法實(shí)踐中具體表現(xiàn)形式及其適用情況。 第三章,查找歸納了其他國家對(duì)于傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則的具體規(guī)定,尤其關(guān)注英美這些國家的傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則,同時(shí)也借鑒了大陸法系國家如日本、德國等國的傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則,為我國傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則的構(gòu)建提供了重要的參考價(jià)值。 第四章,通過分析我國構(gòu)建傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則的必要性表明我國現(xiàn)階段已經(jīng)具備了構(gòu)建傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則的條件,本章通過實(shí)體與程序兩個(gè)角度出發(fā),為我國構(gòu)建傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則提出了一些建議。
[Abstract]:Hearsay evidence rule is one of the oldest and most characteristic evidence rules in Anglo-American law system. In criminal cases in China, witness testimony is a very important piece of evidence. Article 59 of the Criminal procedure Law clearly stipulates that witnesses' testimony must be cross-examined in court before it can be taken as the basis for a final case. However, the common phenomenon in judicial practice is that the rate of witnesses appearing in court is low, a large number of written testimonies enter the court, and the judge reads the testimony of various written witnesses as the basis for the determination of the case. Obviously, the judicial practice does not fulfill the provisions of the law very well. In the new criminal procedure law of 2013, our country has made many new breakthroughs in the aspect of witness appearing in court, trying to perfect the relevant system of witness appearing in court in order to increase the rate of witness appearing in court, however, under the condition of perfect condition, As for the application of the rules, it is also impossible to retreat. The establishment of the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence in the new Criminal procedure Law is a landmark breakthrough on the rule of evidence in our country, and it has made a good start in the admissibility of evidence. For the equally important hearsay evidence rules, the establishment of hearsay evidence rules is conducive to the court to obtain the best evidence, to protect the defendant's right of cross-examination and to make a fair trial. The construction of hearsay evidence rules is of great significance. This paper will analyze hearsay evidence rules from four aspects. The first chapter summarizes the basic concepts of hearsay evidence and hearsay evidence rules, and makes a comparative analysis of the principles of evidence and direct words. The concept and characteristics of hearsay evidence can be clarified more clearly. The second chapter analyzes the legislation of hearsay evidence in our country, enumerates 13 classic cases of judicial error, summarizes the specific manifestations of hearsay evidence in our judicial practice and its application. In the third chapter, it sums up the specific rules of hearsay evidence in other countries, especially the hearsay rules of the United States and the United States, and at the same time draws on the hearsay rules of civil law countries such as Japan and Germany. It provides an important reference value for the construction of hearsay evidence rules in China. Chapter four, by analyzing the necessity of constructing hearsay evidence rule in our country, indicates that our country already has the condition of constructing hearsay evidence rule at present, this chapter sets out from two angles of entity and procedure. Some suggestions are put forward for the construction of hearsay evidence rules in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：延邊大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.23
本文編號(hào)：2212026
[Abstract]:Hearsay evidence rule is one of the oldest and most characteristic evidence rules in Anglo-American law system. In criminal cases in China, witness testimony is a very important piece of evidence. Article 59 of the Criminal procedure Law clearly stipulates that witnesses' testimony must be cross-examined in court before it can be taken as the basis for a final case. However, the common phenomenon in judicial practice is that the rate of witnesses appearing in court is low, a large number of written testimonies enter the court, and the judge reads the testimony of various written witnesses as the basis for the determination of the case. Obviously, the judicial practice does not fulfill the provisions of the law very well. In the new criminal procedure law of 2013, our country has made many new breakthroughs in the aspect of witness appearing in court, trying to perfect the relevant system of witness appearing in court in order to increase the rate of witness appearing in court, however, under the condition of perfect condition, As for the application of the rules, it is also impossible to retreat. The establishment of the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence in the new Criminal procedure Law is a landmark breakthrough on the rule of evidence in our country, and it has made a good start in the admissibility of evidence. For the equally important hearsay evidence rules, the establishment of hearsay evidence rules is conducive to the court to obtain the best evidence, to protect the defendant's right of cross-examination and to make a fair trial. The construction of hearsay evidence rules is of great significance. This paper will analyze hearsay evidence rules from four aspects. The first chapter summarizes the basic concepts of hearsay evidence and hearsay evidence rules, and makes a comparative analysis of the principles of evidence and direct words. The concept and characteristics of hearsay evidence can be clarified more clearly. The second chapter analyzes the legislation of hearsay evidence in our country, enumerates 13 classic cases of judicial error, summarizes the specific manifestations of hearsay evidence in our judicial practice and its application. In the third chapter, it sums up the specific rules of hearsay evidence in other countries, especially the hearsay rules of the United States and the United States, and at the same time draws on the hearsay rules of civil law countries such as Japan and Germany. It provides an important reference value for the construction of hearsay evidence rules in China. Chapter four, by analyzing the necessity of constructing hearsay evidence rule in our country, indicates that our country already has the condition of constructing hearsay evidence rule at present, this chapter sets out from two angles of entity and procedure. Some suggestions are put forward for the construction of hearsay evidence rules in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：延邊大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.23
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 朱立恒;;英國傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則例外的變遷及其啟示[J];比較法研究;2008年06期
2 畢穎;;對(duì)我國刑事訴訟中確立傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則的建議[J];東方企業(yè)文化;2011年24期
3 易明;梁鵬;;論美國證據(jù)法上的傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則[J];東南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年S1期
4 朱冠群;;傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則例外情形的法理分析[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(下旬);2012年02期
5 陳學(xué)權(quán);;論刑事訴訟中實(shí)體公正與程序公正的并重[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2013年04期
6 石巖;;論刑事案件中法官對(duì)證據(jù)屬性的審查判斷規(guī)則[J];法制博覽(中旬刊);2014年01期
7 蔡震宇;;從一起盜竊案看傳聞證據(jù)的審查與運(yùn)用 兼評(píng)新刑事訴訟法第187條的得失[J];中國檢察官;2012年10期
8 蘭志偉;于景平;;論新刑訴法證人出庭作證制度在檢察實(shí)踐中的運(yùn)用[J];河北法學(xué);2013年09期
9 何邦武;;證人出庭作證例外的裁量性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)問題探析——基于修訂后《刑事訴訟法》第187條、第188條的分析[J];政治與法律;2013年05期
10 史立梅;;美國對(duì)質(zhì)權(quán)條款與傳聞證據(jù)規(guī)則關(guān)系之考察[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2010年06期
，本文編號(hào)：2212026
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2212026.html
最近更新
教材專著
