证明责任与举证责任的辨析

The Distinction between the Burden of Proof and Burden of Production

学界对证明责任与举证责任的概念之争可以说从引进相关制度、概念以来就从未停止过。无论是从比较法角度,还是从证明责任的源流,还是从表意的精确和适用的频率上考究,证明责任与举证责任都是两个具有不同内涵的概念,不应将两者混为一谈。出于立法措辞惯例和现实司法实践的考虑,新刑事诉讼法采用了"举证责任"的措辞。证明责任天然涵盖举证责任和说服责任;美国严格区分证明责任和举证责任;坚持举证责任的措辞将导致损害犯罪嫌疑人、被告人合法权利的情况出现。因此,应将"举证责任"的立法措辞改为"证明责任"。

The dispute on the concepts of the burden of proof and burden of production has never stopped since relevant systems and concepts were introduced. Whether investigated from the angle of comparative law, or from origin and development, or from accuracy in expressing purport and frequency of application, they are two concepts with different connotations and should not be confused. Considered from the convention of legislative diction and judiciary practice in reality, the new Criminal Procedure Law employs the term“burden of production”. The burden of proof naturally incorporates burden of production;the burden of proof and burden of production are strictly distinguished from each other in America;the insistent use of the term“burden of production” will result in the situations of suspects and defendants’ legitimate rights being damaged. In view of this, the term“burden of production”should be changed into“the burden of proof”in the new Criminal Procedure Law.