我国的民事诉讼证据制度问题/张纽约
作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-04-30 03:17:33 浏览:9168
来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载
《我国的民事诉讼证据制度问题》
张纽约（中南财经政法大学）
摘要
证据是正义的基础。人们常说“打官司就是打证据”，可见证据在当代诉讼中的重要地位。广义上的民事诉讼证据制度是指规定证据、证据收集、审查判断证据及如何运用证据证明案件事实的法律规范的总称；狭义上则仅指民事诉讼证据制度类型。人类历史上，证据制度经历了从神示证据制度到法定证据制度，再到自由心证的证据制度的发展过程。神示证据制度因其的不理性和野蛮性而被历史所淘汰，而法定证据制度也因其的过分僵化和机械性而被自由心证的证据制度所取代。自由心证原则经历了传统自由心证和现代自由心证两种形态。传统自由心证由于其的过分强调法官自由裁量，不加任何形式的限制，而易导致司法的任意性。20世纪30年代后，针对传统自由心证的不足，各国开始对自由心证的证据制度进行改造，引进证据规则，对法官司法裁量权予以必要的限制，以保障法官心证的客观性，实现司法公正，从而确立了现代自由心证的原则。
长期以来，我国受原苏联及东欧社会主义国家哲学思想、政治主张的影响，而实行“实事求是”的证据制度。要求法官审查判断证据必须以“实事求是”为原则，以“客观真实”为标准，强调法官判案必须以案件的客观真实为依据，赋予法官极大的审查判断权。这种过分追求“客观真实”的诉讼证明要求，实际上是不符合我国的诉讼实际的，在本质上也是违背马克思主义哲学认识论的认识规律的。
为建立符合我国诉讼实际的中国特色的证据制度，首先我们应该改变原来的诉讼理念，明确法官调查取证的案件事实是发生在过去的事实，它是不可能完整地重现于法庭之上的。而法官对案件事实的审查判断通常都是通过自身的经验和推理而作出的，在实践中也是很难做到100％查明案件事实的程度的。所以我们应从追求“客观真实”的证明要求，转向追求“法律真实”的证明要求，改变原来的一元化证明标准，确立“高度盖然性”的民事诉讼证明标准，并以“客观真实”作为我们诉讼的终极目标。其次要改变旧的法官审查判断证据的原则和标准，确立具有中国特色的“法官依法独立审查判断证据”的原则和“法律真实”的标准，承认法官心证的合理性和合法性，保障法官心证自由。
在新一轮的司法改革中，改革和完善民事诉讼证据制度已成为制约我国司法改革能否成功的关键。对于民事诉讼证据制度中存在的问题，我们应深入地研究，提出各种切实可行的解决办法。比如倡导制定一部统一的证据法典，完善我国证据规则；提倡法官心证的自由与客观，保持法官中立，实现司法公正。
关键词
证据制度 自由心证 “实事求是”的证据制度 法律真实 法官心证 高度盖然性
ABSTRACT
Evidence is the basic of justice. People often say, "Going to court is to make evidence ", and it is obvious that the important status of evidence in the contemporary lawsuit. Civil action evidence system of broad sense means the legal norm of stipulating evidence, evidence collecting, evidence checking and judging and how to use evidence to prove the case fact; and the narrow sense only means the evidence system type of civil action. In the history of mankind, the evidence system has been gone through from evidence system of prophesy to system of legal evidence, and then reaches the evidence system of judicial discretion. The evidence system of prophesy is eliminated by history, because it is not rational and barbarous. And the system of legal evidence is replaced by the evidence system of judicial discretion, because it is too rigid and machinery. Judicial discretion has gone through two kinds of shapes of the traditional judicial discretion and modern judicial discretion. Traditional judicial discretion because of their excessive to put emphasis on judge's cutting out amount freely, and without any restriction, and it apt to cause administration of justice wanton. After 1930s, because of the weak point of the traditional judicial discretion, various countries began to carry on the transformation to the traditional judicial discretion, introduce the evidence rule, give the essential restriction to the right of cutting out amount of judge's administration of justice, in order to ensure the objectivity of judge's heart card, realizes the justice, thus established the principle of the modern judicial discretion.
For a long time, our country receives original Soviet Union and socialist state of Eastern Europe’s philosophy thought and political opinion, and implements the evidence system of " seeking truth from facts ". It requires taking" seeking truth from facts " as the principle when the judge is checking and judging the evidence, and taking " objective and true "as the standard, emphasizing a judge must take the objective and true of the case as a basis to decide a case, give judge great judging right. The prove requiring of pursuing " objective and true " lawsuit excessively, is not according with the real lawsuit of our country and Marxist philosophy of epistemology in essence.
In order to set up the evidence system which accords with the distinct Chinese characteristics with real lawsuit of our country, we should change the original lawsuit idea, define the case fact that a judge investigates and collects evidence is taking place in the past at first, it is impossible to reappear in the court completely. Judging the fact of case that is made by judge with his experience and reasoning, and it is very difficult to accomplish 100% degree of finding out the fact of case in practice. So we should from pursuing " objective and true " identification require, to pursue identification that " law is true " require, change the original prove standard of one unified, establish civil action of " high probability " prove standard, and regard it as the ultimate goal of our lawsuit with " objective and true ". Second, we should change the old principle and standard of judging and examining evidence, establish the principle of " the judge examines and judges the evidence independently in accordance with the law " with characteristic of Chinese and standard that " the law is true ", acknowledge the rationality and legitimacy of judge's heart card, ensure judge's heart to be free.
Among judicial reform of new round, that reforming and perfecting civil action evidence system is the key to success administration of justice of our country already. To the questions existing in the evidence system of the civil action, we should study deeply, put forward various kinds of feasible solutions. For example, advocate making a unified evidence code, perfect the rule of evidence of our country; recommend judge’s heart to be free and objective, keep judge's neutrality, realize the justice.
KEY WORD
evidence system judicial discretion evidence system of " seeking truth from facts " law is true judge's heart card high probability
目录
一、证据制度的概念及历史发展
（一）概念
（二）证据制度的历史发展及比较
1、神示证据制度
2、法定证据制度
3、自由心证的证据制度
（1）传统自由心证
（2）现代自由心证
（3）二者的联系与区别
4、证据制度类型的比较
（1）神示证据制度与法定证据制度及自由心证的证据制度的比较
（2）法定证据制度与自由心证的证据制度的比较
二、中国特色的证据制度
（一）新中国证据制度的发展
1、发展历程
2、实事求是的证据制度
（二）客观真实与法律真实的证明要求
1、客观真实的证明要求
下载地址: 点击此处下载