摘要
无论是"客观真实论"还是"法律真实论",都将刑事诉讼活动定性为主体探知客体案件事实的活动,并围绕着如何发现刑事诉讼中的"真实"问题进行各自的理论注解,二者所主张的事实认定标准或者是"符合论"或者是"接近论"。实际上,刑事诉讼活动并非是发生在主、客体间的那种单纯的事实认知活动,而是建诸于主体性认识之上的主体间对案件事实的建构活动。认知活动的目的是再现客观事实的真实面目,而对案件事实的建构活动之目的是在各方之间达成共识,并力求共识达成过程的正当性与合法性,这是一种交往合理性评价而非真与假的事实评价。刑事诉讼事实认定标准应由"真实"走向"程序内的共识"。共识论的提出倡导了一种开放性的诉讼理念,增强了司法判决的可接受性,极大地弘扬了程序正义,并为我国的和谐司法提供了新的理论支持。
Both the theories of objective truth and legal truth regard the nature of criminal litigation as a process of exploring the facts of a case in question, and annotate by their own understandings focusing how to discover the truth of a case and make criteria like ＂resemblances＂ and ＂assimilation＂. In fact, the process of criminal litigation should be described as an inter - subject construction activity instead of knowing something in the case. Thus, it is necessary to make consensus among subjects instead of exploring reality, and such activity is the evaluation of reasonableness of communication but not a judgment related to true or false. Therefore, the criteria of fact finding of criminal litigation should be ＂consensus in procedure＂ instead of ＂truth＂. This understanding upholds an open notion of litigation, make the decision more acceptable, and expand procedural justice, and provide theoretical support for China＇ s harmonious judiciary.
出处
《法制与社会发展》
CSSCI
北大核心
2010年第4期50-60,共11页
Law and Social Development
关键词
真实
程序内的共识
事实认定
truth
consensus in procedure
fact finding
