行政执法证据与刑事证据衔接的理论基础

Theoretical Foundation of the Convergence Between Administrative Law Enforcement Evidence and Criminal Evidence

《刑事诉讼法》第52条第2款,为行政执法证据的刑诉运用提供了依据。理解适用该条文,不仅要关注现实必要性,还需论证实体法、程序法和证据法上的正当性。实体法层面,是因为行政、刑事法律的调整对象有交集,行政违法和犯罪的社会危害性有差异,构成要件的认定可共通;程序法层面,是因为我国实行违法、犯罪二元追责机制,犯罪事实往往先从行政执法中探知,违法和犯罪竞合时刑事程序被前置;证据法层面,是因为证明资源的稀缺性和证据的客观关联性。行刑证据的衔接运用,是中国特色话题,在国外的一元追责机制及证据规则体系中,证据没有转换运用必要。法理正当性要迈向程序正当性,在构建和运用行刑证据衔接运用规则时,应注意证据衔接规则与行刑程序衔接机制的区分,公安司法机关要恪守程序正义底线,并注重当事人的司法权利保障。

Paragraph 2of Article 52 in the Criminal Procedure Law is the legal ground for the application of administrative law enforcement evidence in the criminal procedure.To understand the application of this article,it is necessary to pay attention to the realistic necessity,and the legitimacy of the substantial law,procedural law and evidence law should also be demonstrated.For the substantial law,there are intersections between the adjusted objects of administrative law and criminal law,and the social harmfulness of administrative violations and crimes is different.Therefore,the identification of important cases is common.For the procedural law,the accountability mechanism in China is dualistic,which means the corpus delicti is detected from the administrative enforcement.When the violation of laws is overlapped with crimes,the criminal process will be brought forward.For the evidence law,the scarcity of resources and the relevance of evidence should be proven.The connection and application of the administrative and criminal evidence is Chinese-specific,which is unnecessary abroad for the integral accountability mechanism is applied in their evidence system.In order to connect the legal legitimacy with the procedural legitimacy,the administrative procedureshould be distinguished from the criminal procedure and the judicial power should be guaranteed by adhering to the bottom line of procedural justice.