内心确信的外在制约
|
摘要
内心确信这一主观性判断是形成心证的关键,保障心证客观化必然要以遏制内心确信的恣意为前提。从内心确信的主体、标准、监督和救济角度出发,以期探索预防和阻断法官滥用司法权力、枉法裁判的规制路径,进而外在化、明示化裁判者确信的心素,实现对主观确信客观性标准的规制。明确和实现内心确信的外在制约设置,能够有效提高司法公信力,顺应新时代下司法改革的新要求。
As a subjective judgment,conviction intime is the key of forming discretional evaluation of evidence,and the guarantee of objectivity of discretional evaluation of evidence must have the precondition of constraining the arbitrariness of innermost belief. In order to explore the constraining path of preventing and blocking the abuse of judicial pow er and the misuse of law in adjudication of the judge,perspectives are selected of the subject,standard,supervision and relief of conviction intime. Furthermore,the assurance animus of referee can be externalized and indicated,and realize the rule and regulation of objectivity standards of subjective conviction. To clarify and realize the setting of external constraint of conviction intime can effectively improve the credibility of judiciary,and comply w ith the new requirements of judicial reform in the New Era.
As a subjective judgment,conviction intime is the key of forming discretional evaluation of evidence,and the guarantee of objectivity of discretional evaluation of evidence must have the precondition of constraining the arbitrariness of innermost belief. In order to explore the constraining path of preventing and blocking the abuse of judicial pow er and the misuse of law in adjudication of the judge,perspectives are selected of the subject,standard,supervision and relief of conviction intime. Furthermore,the assurance animus of referee can be externalized and indicated,and realize the rule and regulation of objectivity standards of subjective conviction. To clarify and realize the setting of external constraint of conviction intime can effectively improve the credibility of judiciary,and comply w ith the new requirements of judicial reform in the New Era.
引文
[1]何家弘.证据学论坛[M].北京:中国检察出版社,2000:367.
[2]新堂幸司.新民事诉讼法[M].林剑锋,译.北京:法律出版社,2008:503.
[3]江伟.民事诉讼法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2016:207.
[4]张伟.“相同”与“差异”之间:民事诉讼证明标准的客观化初探[J].东南学术,2015(3):193-196.
[5]裴苍龄.自由心证评析[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2014(4):1-15.
[6]张卫平.认识经验法则[J].清华法学,2008(6):6-24.
[7]方金刚.案件事实认定论[M].北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2005:105.
[8]张卫平.自由心证原则的再认识:制约与保障——以民事诉讼的事实认定为中心[J].政法论丛,2017(4):14-21.
[9]李祖军.自由心证与法官依法独立判断[J].现代法学,2004(5):102-108.
[10]怀效锋.法院与法官[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:7.
[11]王利民.司法改革研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:20.
[12]张卫平.证明标准建构的乌托邦[J].法学研究,2003(4):60-69.
[13]张卫平.外国民事证据制度研究[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2003:428.
[14]姜世明.证据评价论[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2017:53.
[15]王德新.论约束性自由心证制度的构建[J].辽东学院学报,2011(4):26-30.
[2]新堂幸司.新民事诉讼法[M].林剑锋,译.北京:法律出版社,2008:503.
[3]江伟.民事诉讼法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2016:207.
[4]张伟.“相同”与“差异”之间:民事诉讼证明标准的客观化初探[J].东南学术,2015(3):193-196.
[5]裴苍龄.自由心证评析[J].甘肃政法学院学报,2014(4):1-15.
[6]张卫平.认识经验法则[J].清华法学,2008(6):6-24.
[7]方金刚.案件事实认定论[M].北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2005:105.
[8]张卫平.自由心证原则的再认识:制约与保障——以民事诉讼的事实认定为中心[J].政法论丛,2017(4):14-21.
[9]李祖军.自由心证与法官依法独立判断[J].现代法学,2004(5):102-108.
[10]怀效锋.法院与法官[M].北京:法律出版社,2006:7.
[11]王利民.司法改革研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2000:20.
[12]张卫平.证明标准建构的乌托邦[J].法学研究,2003(4):60-69.
[13]张卫平.外国民事证据制度研究[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2003:428.
[14]姜世明.证据评价论[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2017:53.
[15]王德新.论约束性自由心证制度的构建[J].辽东学院学报,2011(4):26-30.