“两高”2017年新颁的《关于适用犯罪嫌疑人、被告人逃匿、死亡案件违法所得没收程序若干问题的规定》对于违法所得没收程序的证明对象、证明责任分配以及证明标准等方面,仍然存在模糊不清或有待完善的问题。在证明对象方面,应当证明犯罪事实存在、涉案财物与犯罪行为之间存在实质联系;如果利害关系人提出异议,还需要证明利害关系人对涉案财物是否具有合法所有权。在证明责任分配上,一般情况下,由检察机关承担举证责任,但利害关系人是否具有合法所有权的举证责任,应当由利害关系人承担。在证明标准方面,需要考虑检察机关和利害关系人间举证责任的轻重,分别做出要求,其中检察机关的证明标准应当高于优势证据标准,而利害关系人的证明标准为优势证据标准。 “Two high” issued in 2017 << on the application of criminal suspects, defendants escape, death cases illegal income confiscation process of a number of issues >> Provisions on the confiscation of illegal income proves that the object of proof, distribution of burden of proof and proof of standards , There are still ambiguities or problems that need to be perfected. In the aspect of object of proof, it should be proved that the fact of crime exists, and there is a substantial connection between the property involved and the criminal act. If the objection is raised by the interested party, it also needs to prove whether the interested party has legal ownership of the property involved. In the distribution of burden of proof, under normal circumstances, the prosecution should bear the burden of proof, but whether the interested parties have the legal ownership of the burden of proof should be borne by the interested parties. In terms of certification standards, the burden of proof between the procuratorial organs and the interested parties needs to be considered, and the requirements for them respectively should be taken into consideration. Among them, the standards for the prosecution’s certification should be higher than the superior evidence standards, while the proof standards for the interested parties are the superior evidence standards.