编者按:在民事证明领域,我国学界曾长期致力于对域外理论的解读和移植,并在此基础之上逐步形成了以证明责任为中心的理论体系。然而,与理论研究层面的繁荣相比,证明责任在司法实践层面不但未能达到预期效果,而且与我国本土已有的证据规则及传统观念产生了严重的排异与冲突,程序的适用性问题始终萦绕着证明责任理论,一方面成为人们诘难其正当性的入口,另一方面也成为其 Editor’s Note: In the field of civil proof, our academic circles have long devoted themselves to the interpretation and transplantation of extraterritorial theories. On this basis, a theoretical system centered on the burden of proof has been gradually formed. However, compared with the prosperity at the level of theoretical research, the burden of proof not only failed to achieve the desired effect at the judicial practice level, but also caused serious exclusion and conflict with the existing evidence rules and traditional concepts in our country. The applicability of the procedure Always haunted by the theory of burden of proof, on the one hand, it becomes an entrance to people’s misgivings, on the other hand,