论刑事电子证据的可采性

电子证据是随着计算机信息技术、网络技术发展而衍生起来的一种新型证据形式,在刑诉法修订前,学界一直对电子证据的定位和定性争论不休,2012年3月通过的新刑事诉讼法第四十八条将"电子数据"新增为一种证据种类,从而解决了电子证据的证据属性问题,标志着电子证据的法律地位在中国刑事诉讼法中的确立。但电子证据其在司法实践中的具体运用仍缺乏相应的法律规制,尤其是刑事电子证据的可采性在立法上缺乏明确的规则,导致其在实践中的适用具有不确定性。因此,构建中国刑事电子证据的可采性规则,是刑事诉讼制度和证据法发展的需要。     

电子证据的基本法律问题

随着计算机网络技术的应用和发展,电子证据对传统的证据概念造成巨大冲击,因此有必要对电子证据进行深入研究.     

论民事诉讼非法证据排除规则

民事诉讼中的非法证据在中国的立法中近乎处于空白,尽管在相关的司法解释中有所提及,但是在实际的证据采信中,非法证据的大量出现不但会给法官的裁断造成障碍,还会给相对人对证据的采集造成极大的不利。于是非法证据排除规则在各国的立法中相继加以不同程度的利用,并在民事、刑事中得到了充分的体现。中国也在这两方面大胆地对西方的法律做了借鉴,但是不同的法律制度决定了不同的价值观,排除规则的利用仍然要与本国的实际紧密结合。     

论刑事诉讼中的电子数据界定

电子数据是信息化时代在证据领域的反映。对于这种新的证据类型定位,一直存在各种争议。由于中国《刑事诉讼法》是通过证据存在形式来划分证据的,因此,电子数据的内涵与外延均应当围绕这一标准进行。同时,在电子数据的认定上,应当区分证据能力认定与证明力认定两个步骤。在证明力认定时,电子数据还应当遵循补强证据规则与最佳证据规则。     

交通事故认定书的证据地位辨析

在刑事司法实践中,交通事故认定书作为关键证据使用已成惯例,其实践意义上的证据地位不可动摇。但是,其本质特征既不符合鉴定结论,也不能归于书证或勘验、检查笔录。可见,法定证据种类对证据理论研究和司法实践形成了障碍。为了保持法之稳定性和前瞻性,建议对证据的法定概念和分类进行完善,即在立法上,规定概括的证据概念,对证据种类不做规范。     

大数据背景下职务犯罪电子证据取证问题研究

《监察法》赋予监察机关进行技术调查的权限,其《实施条例》又对监察机关电子证据取证规则进行更为严格细致的规定。大数据背景下,纪委监委对电子证据的收集和认定成为打击职务犯罪的强有力武器。职务犯罪本身具备隐蔽性强、犯罪方法技术性强等特殊性,采取传统的取证方式难以证明犯罪事实的发生,因此大数据技术对于电子证据获取的研判就更加重要。经大数据筛查检查后的电子证据在法庭上经过质证环节能够作为法院裁判的依据,从而有效惩治职务犯罪中的被告人并且震慑和预防职务犯罪的发生。     

论民事证据声请中的当事人具体化义务

民事证据声请中的当事人具体化义务要求当事人应当将证据声请事项具体化;该义务以辩论主义、当事人诉讼促进义务为理论基础;其正当性在于防免证据声请的抽象化、诉讼相对人防御的可能性及证人利益的自我保护性、法官进行证据调查的良好实现;应当将其界定为分层、有界以及完备的具体化义务;中国关于证据声请的立法以及司法存在诸多不足,应以具体化义务为基础,结合其他程序和制度进行相应完善。     

法国民事证据制度书证优先原则及其借鉴

书证优先原则是法国民事证据制度的一大特色,其主要特征为对于一定数额以上的民事法律行为,法院只采纳书证作为证据的形式并排斥证人证言等其他证据方法。尽管书证优先原则对民事诉讼中当事人运用证据方法的意思自治存在着一定的阻碍作用,但是由于书证的客观性较强,容易对民事法律行为当事人的行为意图和意志固定化,其利大于弊。在证人证言普遍遭遇困境和合同纠纷日益增多的现实性国情下,法国民事证据制度书证优先原则的立法值得我们借鉴。     

论刑事非法证据排除规则之本土化构建

证据是诉讼的基石,诉讼是证据的博弈,一切诉讼活动实际上都是围绕证据的收集和运用而展开。然而,在实践中,由于证据的运用不适当,冤假错案频频见诸报端,因此构建中国刑事非法证据排除规则已势在必行。而要构建一套行之有效的证据规则,必须分析本国非法证据排除规则的现状及存在的问题,并借鉴其它国家的立法经验,才有可能制定出既合乎本土特征又与国际社会接轨的排除规则。     

非法证据排除的证明方法

中国的非法证据排除规则由2010年的《非法证据排除规定》和2012年新修订的《刑事诉讼法》予以确立和完善.但是,在立法取得巨大进步的同时,实践中的某些老问题似乎并未得到完全解决.在非法证据排除证明中,有些法官仍然要求辩方进行“严格证明”,却允许控方进行“自由证明”.对于控方证明方法的要求类似于严格证明,但对于辩方证明方法的规定则不甚明确.为了保障非法证据排除规则应有效力的发挥,应当正视那些易被利用的疏漏,对模糊的规定加以明确,对阙如的规定进行增补.     

中美书证证据能力规则之比较

我国证据法应借鉴美国《联邦证据规则》,从下述五个方面完善现有的书证证据能力规则:以鉴真规则和传闻证据规则替代抽象的辨别真伪规则,从而分别保证书证的"形式真实"和内容真实;从概念、整体思路、可操作性三个角度完善我国的原始文书规则;赋予对方异议权以增强我国摘录完整性规则的可操作性;应引进摘要采纳规则,以适应数量巨大书证出示调查的需要;采取广义的书证界定,取消视听资料和电子证据这两种法定证据种类,正视转化书证、综合性书证的存在并对其实行多重审查。     

论笔录类证据的法定化与言词化

笔录类证据是《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第48条规定的法定证据种类之一,是侦查机关在侦查行为过程中制作的、旨在获取证据物或认定案件事实的笔录类材料。作为特定侦查行为的固定方式,笔录类证据有着规范侦查行为的价值;作为证据体系的重要组成部分,笔录类证据有着证明案件事实的价值。其既可以充当实质证据,也可以充当实物证据的补助证据。在司法实践中,笔录类证据的适用存在类型泛化和质证虚化两大问题。在类型上,笔录类证据应当走向法定化,即明确笔录类证据包括勘验笔录、检查笔录、辨认笔录、侦查实验笔录、搜查笔录、扣押笔录和证据提取笔录,不包括讯问、询问笔录和情况说明。在质证程序上,笔录类证据应当走向言词化,即构建必要笔录制作人、见证人出庭作证制度和相应配套措施,以还原案件事实真相。     

司法改良和不彻底主义——基于刑事诉讼法再修改中证据部分的分析(英文)

2012年中国《刑事诉讼法修正案》对证据制度进行了修正,较修改前的内容有进步之处,也存在若干不足。例如,立法中虽然认同反对强迫自证其罪,但却并不认同沉默权,而且保留了行为人的供述义务;对"威胁"、"引诱"和"欺骗"这些非法取供行为发出宽容的信号;对非法搜查、扣押的取证行为缺乏坚决遏制的立法态度;对保证证人出庭作证来说,虽然规定了人身安全保障、经济补偿和司法处分措施,却没有规定这一制度最为重要的传闻证据规则,等等。     

论我国证据法的立法模式

英美国家独立制定证据法 ,而大陆法国家将证据法融入诉讼法或者实体法中。笔者认为证据立法模式的选择需要综合考虑立法技术、与诉讼法的协调、证据法的实际功能以及法律传统的承继与法律移植的接受等诸多因素。为此在我国现有诉讼法的框架内补充完善证据法规范 ,即通过修改诉讼法一并完善证据立法应当是最佳的选择路径     

Equipping child protection practitioners to intervene to protect children from cumulative harm: legislation and policy in Victoria,Australia

Many children are repeatedly reported to statutory child protection services, but do not receive the protection they need. Many such children are suffering chronic maltreatment, which is likely to result in cumulative harm. Chronic maltreatment encompasses emotional abuse and chronic neglect. As a result, children can experience a range of cognitive, emotional, and behavioural problems that are more serious than those associated with other abuse types. This paper focuses on the Victorian statutory child protection system, and considers why cumulative harm is not receiving the attention the legislation intends. Under the Victorian legislation cumulative harm must be proven on grounds of emotional abuse and/or neglect. However, it is difficult for child protection practitioners to place before the court the necessary evidence to establish these grounds. The paper concludes that the legal definitions of emotional abuse and neglect should not require evidence of a link between the abusive actions of the parent and the poor outcomes for the child. The evidentiary focus should be on the actions of the parent. Furthermore, legislation should focus on abusive parental behaviours that are likely to result in cumulative harm, which are more concrete and measureable than emotional abuse and neglect, such as intimate partner violence and parental illicit drug use.     

Cell phones,electronic delivery systems and social cash transfers: Recent evidence and experiences from Africa

Electronic delivery systems for social cash transfer programmes offer advantages to programme implementers and benefit recipients in terms of enhanced cost efficiency and flexibility. The rapid penetration of cell phone infrastructure, combined with a growing interest from banks to extend financial services, is likely to make the electronic delivery of cash transfers an increasingly viable option. Taking into account the broader benefits for cash transfer recipients arising from improved access to financial services infrastructure, this article elaborates recent evidence and experiences from Kenya, Malawi, Namibia and Swaziland. The article concludes with an assessment of the opportunities and challenges for scaling‐up electronic delivery systems.     

Problematising aspects of evidence‐based policy: an analysis illustrated by an Australian homelessness policy 1985–2008

Although recently criticised in the academic literature, the past few decades have seen international demand for policies to be based on evidence. In this article three aspects of the process of evidence‐based policy (EBP) are briefly examined. They include: (1) how evidence becomes socially worthy of the title; (2) the problems which arise for EBP when there is conflicting or rival evidence; and (3) facets of the transition from evidence to policy – the evidence–policy nexus. After problematising evidence‐based research in this limited way, the issues are clarified and illustrated by reference to the history of the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP: 1985–2008), renown at the time as the major Australian program for people who were homeless. SAAP involved an agreement enshrined in legislation between the Commonwealth and all states and territories of the Federation. The argument is based on evidence from the four official national reports of the policy which, over the period of the program, evaluated SAAP and were commissioned and accepted as authoritative by federal, state and territory governments. In a nutshell, the argument is that, at each iteration of SAAP, subsequent policy discounted one of the sets of evidence in the official National Evaluations. This concerned the clear evidence of a lack of external, affordable accommodation options which, in turn, undermined the objectives of the program. The issue remains topical as more recent evidence substantiates the imperative for increased accommodation options for clients ready to exit agencies.     

心理测试结论在刑事证据体系中的价值与定位

心理测试是刑事证明领域的一个新问题,如何定位关系着该技术的命运。心理测试结论的科学依据和现实作用决定了其证据价值,其在证据能力上具有许容性,其证明力应由法官自由心证。侦查线索与法庭证据的有效契合,应当成为心理测试结论在刑事证据体系中的真正归宿。     

期刊网络出版初探

伴随着数字化技术的发展 ,期刊网络出版的时代已经到来。电子版期刊具有高效、快捷、方便、节能、省钱的优势 ,使传统期刊面临着严峻挑战。作为期刊出版者 ,谁能尽快地进入网络 ,谁就能在未来的出版竞争中掌握主动权。国家有关部门在完善《著作权法》的同时 ,应抓紧制定与电子期刊有关的编排、检索、信息交换等规范与标准 ,以保证出版单位的网络出版与印刷出版形成双赢的局面     

Judicial Amendment and Lack of Thoroughness: Analysis of Provisions on Evidence in the Amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law

2012年中国?刑事诉讼法修正案?对证据制度进行了修正, 较修改前的内容有进 步之处, 也存在若干不足。例如, 立法中虽然认同反对强迫自证其罪, 但却并不认同 沉默权, 而且保留了行为人的供述义务; 对“威胁”, “引诱”和“欺骗”这些非法 取供行为发出宽容的信号; 对非法搜查、扣押的取证行为缺乏坚决遏制的立法态度; 对保证证人出庭作证来说, 虽然规定了人身安全保障, 经济补偿和司法处分措施, 却 没有规定这一制度最为重要的传闻证据规则, 等等。关键词: 刑事诉讼 司法改良 证据制度 不彻底主义

China’s Amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law of 2012 revises the provisions on rules of evidence. There are a number of positive changes compared to the original text, but some shortcomings still exist. For instance, although the legislation recognizes the right against compulsory self-incrimination, it does not acknowledge the right to silence and retains the obligation of the accused to confess; the amended provisions are more tolerant of the use of illegal tactics like “threats,” “enticement” and “deceit” to obtain confessions; the legislative approach does not resolutely deter unlawful search and seizure in the collection of evidence; and although there are provisions for protection of personal safety, financial compensation and judicial sanctions to ensure that witnesses appear before court to testify, there are no provisions on the most important rule in the evidence system, the hearsay rule.