证人出庭作证“必要性条款”解释适用研究

A Study on the Interpretation and Application of the“Necessity Clause”for Witnesses to Testify in Court

证人出庭与否不仅关系到案件事实真相的准确查明,还直接关系到被告人辩护权利能否得到充分的尊重和保障。通过对420份裁判文书的梳理可以发现,人民法院在证人“有必要出庭”条款的适用上,主要关注事实认定的准确性,而对被告人诉讼权利缺乏应有的关照。在权利保障已成为刑事司法主流话语的今天,有必要“以对质权为中心”对该条款进行规范解释。但在个案适用过程中,为了实现证人出庭背后多重法益的动态平衡与相对稳定,对质权的行使应当具有一定的灵活性。在控辩双方提出实质异议的情况下,法官原则上应当允许证人出庭,即使在例外情形下认为“没有必要出庭”,也应提供令人信服的理由。为此,需要在比例原则的基本框架下,对人民法院认为“证人没有必要出庭”的充分理由进行类型化建构,以最大限度地保障公正审判的实现。

Whether the witness appears in court or not is not only related to the accurate in⁃vestigation of the truth of the case,but also directly related to whether the defendant’s right to defense can be properly respected and guaranteed.Through sorting out 420 judgment documents,it can be found that the people’s court mainly focuses on the accuracy of fact determination in the application of the“necessity of appearing in court”clause,but lacks due attention for the de⁃fendant’s litigation rights.Nowadays,the protection of rights has become the mainstream dis⁃course of criminal justice,so it is necessary to interpret this clause normatively“with the right of confrontation as the center”.However,in the process of case application,in order to achieve the dynamic balance and relative stability of multiple legal interests behind the witness’s appearance in court,the exercise of the confrontation right should be flexible.In the case of substantive ob⁃jections raised by the prosecution and the defense,the judge should,in principle,allow the wit⁃ness to appear in court,and ought to provide convincing reasons even if it is deemed“not neces⁃sary”in exceptional circumstances.Therefore,under the basic framework of the principle of pro⁃portionality,it is necessary to construct the sufficient reasons for the people’s court to consider that“witnesses are not necessary to appear in court”in order to maximize the realization of fair trial.