论文部分内容阅读
传闻证据规则作为英美法系国家一项重要的证据规则,在诉讼过程中,尤其是在刑事诉讼过程中始终起着极其重要的作用。它与大陆法系国家的直接言词原则既相类似又有所不同,随着社会的发展与进步,这一古老的证据规则面临着越来越多的挑战,促使各英美法系国家不断进行改革与完善。我国实行强职权主义诉讼模式,这与传闻证据规则的对抗制诉讼的制度基础并不相符,所以在我国不宜建立这一规则,只能借鉴其有益部分,在此基础上更宜建立大陆法系国家的直接言词原则。
As a very important evidence rule in common law countries, hearsay rules play an extremely important role in litigation process, especially in the process of criminal procedure. It is similar to and different from the principle of direct verbalization in civil law countries. With the development and progress of society, the old evidence rule is facing more and more challenges, urging the common law countries in Britain to carry out constant reforms And perfect. The implementation of the doctrine of powerful doctrine in our country does not conform to the institutional basis of antitrust litigation in the rules of hearsay evidence. Therefore, we should not establish this rule in our country but only draw lessons from its beneficial parts. On this basis, it is more appropriate to establish a civil law system The State’s principle of direct speech.