论供述排除的目的与条件——中美供述排除规则的比较研究

On the Goal and Tests for the Exclusion of Confessions:A Comparison between China and the US.

供述排除的目的在一定程度上决定排除规则中排除供述的具体条件的设置,供述排除的目的是供述排除规则中的核心内容,排除的条件也很重要,它们决定了排除规则的适用效果。美国供述排除的目的经历了从"排除不可靠的供述以预防误判"到"排除违法取得的供述以保障权利"的转变,而中国的司法实践中仍以预防错案为主。在排除供述的条件方面两国差异很大,这是由目的的不同所导致。中国目前的供述排除规则操作性不强,可能影响规则的施行效果。

To some extent, the rationale of exclusion of confession determines the specific standards for suppression. Both the rationale and standards are of significance to the exclusionary rule of confession. They are determinant to the application of the rule. The rationale in the United States shifted from ＂exclusion of unreliable confessions so as to prevent wrongful conviction＂ to ＂exclusion of confessions obtained through violating Miranda so as to safeguard human rights＂. But in China the judiciary excludes confessions to prevent wrongful conviction. The standards vary greatly in the two countries, which can be attributed to the difference of rationales. The exclusionary rule of confession is less operative in China, which would influence its implementation in the future.