论刑事诉讼中“情况说明”的证据能力

On Credibility of "Information Note" in Criminal Action

"情况说明"随着司法实践的需要应运而生,从"两个证据规定"开始,刑事诉讼的规范层面开始将其纳入法条,然而在接下来包括2013年《刑事诉讼法》和《高检规则》等规范中,"情况说明"的证据能力一直摇摆在承认与否定之间。在理论的维度里,关于"情况说明"是否具有证据能力的讨论从未终止。反对者的观点太过注重证据的法定形式,且"一刀切"的做法太过武断。赞同者将"情况说明"进行类型化分析,可以有助于把握每一类"情况说明"的特点,然而"相对否定派"和"相对肯定派"在对待"程序类情况说明"和"证据类情况说明"的证据能力时出现了分歧,其中"相对否定派"未能准确把握刑事诉讼证明对象的范围。

＂ Information note＂ appears with the demand of judicial practice. It is in the statutes of ＂ two evidence rules＂ that ＂ information note＂ has been a part of provisions for the first time. However,since the Criminal Procedure of 2013 and the judicial rules by Supreme People＇s Procuratorate issued,the credibility of ＂ information note＂ has always been uncertain between positive and negative. In the theory research,the debate of the credibility of ＂ information note＂ has never stopped. While the objectors whose sweeping approach to ＂ information note＂ turns out to be crude put too much emphasis on the legal form of evidence,the approvers take a categorization analysis on the ＂ information note＂,which is helpful to grasp the character of each ＂ information note＂. And among the approvers,the ＂ relative negative branch＂ whose attitude on the credibility of ＂ procedural information note＂ and ＂ evidential information note＂ differs from the ＂ relative positive branch＂ fails to understand the accurate scope of objects of proof in criminal procedure.