排除规则中的“非法证据”——一个亟待重塑的概念

排除规则中的“非法证据”是一个内涵和外延都不清晰的概念，理论上存在着一种扩大化解释，实践中又是一个难以准确把握的话语。认定“非法证据”的标准有三：一是取证主体的公权性；二是取证行为的违法性；三是取证后果的侵权性。据此，对通说广义的“非法证据”概念进行解构和重塑，从理论上将其划分为“非法证据”、“要件欠缺证据”和“瑕疵证据”，使之具有不同的适用对象和处理规则。从而把排除规则中的“非法证据”界定在一个合理范围内，使排除规则的适用更具针对性，解决实践中各，行其是的问题。

"Illegal Evidence" in Exclusionary Rule: A Concept to be Re-defined

Illegal evidence in exclusionary rule is a concept with an unclear definition,for it seems to involve overstatement in theory and delicacy in practice.There are three criteria for illegal evidence,i.e.1)public power by the subjects of evidence obtaining;2)unlawfulness of evidence obtaining;3)tort concerning evidence obtaining.By means of decoding and re-defined,illegal evidence in the broad sense can be classified into "illegal evidence","evidence lacking significant items",and "defective evidence",each of which shall be applied to different situations and rules.Viewed in this way,illegal evidence in exclusionary rule should be limited to a reasonable extent and its application should be re-defined.