证据的审查判断,法官是否享有自由裁量权,在立法上无外乎二种基本方式:其一是严格规则主义,即法官对证据的审查判断没有自由裁量权,必须遵照证据法的规定操作,证据的取舍与证明力均由法律一一明文规定,绝对严格规则主义是力图从司法过程中完全排除法官的自由裁量因素的立法方式;其二是自由裁量主义,即法官对证据的审查判断享有自由裁量权,证据的取舍与证明力悉凭法官决定,绝对的自由裁量主义就是无法司法,就是人治。绝 The examination of evidence judges whether judges have discretion or not. There are no two basic ways in the legislation: one is strict rules, that is, the judge does not have the discretion to judge the evidence and must follow the rules of evidence law. The choice of evidence and the power of proof are stipulated in the law one by one. Absolute strict regularism is an attempt to completely exclude the judge’s discretionary factors from the judicial process. The second is discretion, that is, the judge judges the evidence Discretion, Evidence Choice and Proof. According to the judge’s decision, absolute discretionism is no justice, that is, the rule of man. Absolutely