论文部分内容阅读
由于诉讼传统、结构方面发展的差异,世界各国关于证据能力的处理方法和侧重点不尽相同。英美法系均依证据的可采纳性理论加以处理,仅消极地就无证据能力或其证据能力受限制情形加以规定。其中不可采纳的证据主要存有两种情况:一是缺乏关联性的证据,二是受排除的证据。而大陆法系关于证据能力的规则要比英美法系少得多,对于证据能力很少加以限制,凡可作为证据之资料,均具有理论上的证据能力。本文拟从设置证据能力规则的可行性与我国的现状和本人的设想两个方面来具体展开探讨。
Due to the differences in the litigation tradition and the structural development, the methods and priorities of different countries in the world about the ability of evidence vary. The Anglo-American legal system is dealt with according to the admissibility theory of evidence, and only negatively regulates the situation without evidence capability or with limited evidence capacity. There are two main types of evidence that can not be adopted: one is the lack of evidence of relevance, and the other is evidence of exclusion. However, the civil law rules on evidence ability are far less than the Anglo-American legal system, and the evidence ability is seldom limited. Any evidence that can be used as evidence has the theoretical evidence ability. This article intends to explore the feasibility of setting rules of evidence competency and the current situation of our country and my own ideas.