论文部分内容阅读
2010年5月30日,最高人民法院、最高人民检察院、公安部、国家安全部和司法部联合发布了《关于办理死刑案件审查判断证据若干问题的规定》和《关于办理刑事案件排除非法证据若干问题的规定》(简称“两个证据规定”),“两个证据规定”的出台为惩罚犯罪,保障人权提供了有力支持,也大大丰富了我国大陆的刑事证据排除法则,但是法律的明文规定不一定意味着司法实践中违法证据排除的改善,本文研究台湾的刑事证据排除法则,尤以自白法则的排除为重点,为中国大陆“两个证据规定”的实施提供建议,并为中国大陆建立自白任意性原则提出几点思考。
On May 30, 2010, the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Justice jointly promulgated the “Provisions on Certain Issues Concerning the Evidence in Handling Death Penalty Cases for Examination and Examination” and the “Provisions on Handling Criminal Cases Excluding Illegal Evidence The Provisions of the Problems ”(referred to as“ the two rules of evidence ”) and the promulgation of the“ two rules of evidence ”provided strong support for punishing crimes and safeguarding human rights and greatly enriched the law of criminal evidence exclusion in Mainland China. However, The express provision of law does not necessarily mean the improvement of exclusion of illegal evidence in judicial practice. This article studies Taiwan’s exclusionary law of criminal evidence, especially the exclusion of confession, and provides suggestions for the implementation of the “two evidence provisions” in Mainland China , And put forward some thoughts on how to establish the principle of confession arbitrariness in mainland China.