论文部分内容阅读
目前刑事诉讼法学界在证明标准问题上存在“客观真实”与“法律真实”的争论。其实,这一对法律概念蕴含着证明理念、证明程度和证明要求这样三个层面的涵义,我们可以从这三个不同的视角来审视“客观真实说”与“法律真实说”的对立。刑事诉讼中应当确立法律真实的证明观念,客观真实的证明程度是刑事诉讼证明的理想境界,兼采客观真实与法律真实的证明要求是我国刑事司法的现实选择。在刑事司法上坚持相对合理主义,有助于缓解刑事诉讼证明的理想与现实之间的冲突。
At present, there is a dispute between “objective truth” and “legal truth” on the standard of proof of criminal procedure law. Actually, this concept of law implies three concepts: concept of proof, level of proof and requirement of proof. We can examine the contradiction between “objective truth” and “legal truth” from these three different perspectives. The concept of true proof of law should be established in criminal litigation. The objective and true degree of proof is the ideal state of criminal procedure proof. It is the realistic choice of criminal justice in our country to adopt the objective reality and the true proof of law. Adhering to the relatively rationalism in criminal justice can help to ease the conflict between the ideal and the reality proved by criminal procedure.