证据排除是现代证据法的核心精神。在理想状态下,一项证据被“排除”,意味着该证据所反映的信息对于案件事实的最终认定不产生任何影响。从世界各国的具体情况来看,为达到这种理想状态,共有三种途径,分别适用于不同的法系。总体而言,普通法系的程序设置最符合证据排除的要求,而大陆法系在这一问题上则显得力不从心。为了使证据排除规则真正落到实处,包括我国在内采取职权主义审判模式的国家都需要进一步完善相关的配套制度。 Evidence exclusion is the core of modern evidence law. Ideally, a piece of evidence is “excluded,” meaning that the information it reflects does not in any way affect the eventual recognition of the facts of the case. Judging from the specific situations of various countries in the world, there are three ways to achieve this ideal state, which are applicable to different legal systems respectively. In general, the common law system is most suited to the exclusion of evidentiary procedures, whereas the civil law system seems to be inadequate on this issue. In order for the rule of evidence exclusion to be truly implemented, countries that adopt the mode of trial of official power, including our own, need to further improve relevant supporting systems.