侦查人员作证的制度困境

Institutional Dilemmas of Criminal Investigators Testifying in Court

尽管2012年我国通过修改《刑事诉讼法》确立了侦查人员作证制度,但是就目前的刑事诉讼立法与司法而言,我国侦查人员作证将面临一系列制度性的困境。首先,在缺乏传闻证据规则跟进的情况下,公诉人员凭借各种书面材料足以证明控方证据的合法性,因而根本没有必要提请侦查人员出庭作证。其次,尽管侦查人员应该以证人身份出庭作证,但是基于侦查人员的特殊性质,现行的证人作证制度尚不足以保证侦查人员出庭作证。最后,在侦查人员存在各种思想顾虑以及侦查人力资源配置严重短缺的情况下,目前的司法管理制度无法为侦查人员作证提供足够的支持。

Although China established the system of criminal investigators testifying in court by amending the criminal procedure law in 2012, in point of the current legislation and justice of criminal procedure, the system will be faced with a series of institutional dilemmas. First, in the case of lack of the hearsay rule, public prosecutors can prove the legality of evidence by all kinds of written materials, and it is unnecessary for them to request criminal investigators to testify in court. Secondly, although a criminal investigator shall testify in court as a witness, the existing witness testifying system fails to make sure that the criminal investigator can testify in court because of the especial characteristics of the criminal investigator. Finally, given that the criminal investigators have many scrupulous thoughts, and there is a severe shortage of the investigator human resources, the existing judicial management system fails to provide sufficient support for the criminal investigator to testify in court.