發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-10-21 15:27

【摘要】：《關(guān)于辦理死刑案件審查判斷證據(jù)若干問(wèn)題的規(guī)定》中存在中國(guó)式的證明力規(guī)則。然而,與英美法系的證據(jù)規(guī)則相比,我國(guó)的證據(jù)證明力規(guī)則效力,具有弱規(guī)范性、非規(guī)范性和非授權(quán)性的特點(diǎn)。對(duì)于中國(guó)證明力規(guī)則諸多教科書(shū)式的文本表達(dá),規(guī)則制定者有必要在"立法"技術(shù)上反思:將大量經(jīng)驗(yàn)性規(guī)則作為司法解釋條款"法律化",難免有重回法定制度時(shí)代之嫌。還應(yīng)注意,證明力規(guī)則的排除條款的剛性弱化,使這一證據(jù)規(guī)則警示功能降低,有悖于設(shè)立初衷。
[Abstract]:There are Chinese rules of proof in examining and judging evidence in death penalty cases. However, compared with the evidence rules of Anglo-American law system, the rule of proof power in our country has the characteristics of weak normative, non-normative and unauthorized. It is necessary for the rule makers to reflect on the "legislation" technology for the text expression of the rules of proof in China: it is hard to avoid the possibility of returning to the era of legal system if a large number of empirical rules are taken as terms of judicial interpretation "legalization". It should also be noted that the rigidity of the exclusion clause of the rule of proof is weakened, which reduces the warning function of the rule of evidence, which is contrary to the original intention of establishment.
【作者單位】： 遼寧大學(xué)法學(xué)院;遼寧大學(xué)文學(xué)院;
【基金】：遼寧省教育廳優(yōu)秀人才資助項(xiàng)目(WJQ2012004) 國(guó)家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金資助項(xiàng)目(09BFX064)
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.2

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 羅書(shū)平;;死刑復(fù)核程序的現(xiàn)狀及法律思考[J];法學(xué)家;1995年02期

2 陳華杰;略議死刑案件中處理存疑證據(jù)的若干方式[J];法律適用;2005年01期

3 林維;;死刑案件應(yīng)當(dāng)如何復(fù)核[J];w，

本文編號(hào)：2285526