庭审实质化背景下刑事二审证人出庭必要性审查研究

Research on necessity review for criminal witnesses appearing in trial of second instance under the background of trial centralism reform

证人出庭是刑事二审庭审实质化改革的重要内容。司法实践中,二审法官对审前及一审程序中已接受询问的证人出庭必要性审查极为严苛,对新证人的审查较宽松,尺度不一,操作随意。二审法庭是否需要传唤证人到庭,从根本上取决于二审程序的诉讼构造。在庭审实质化改革的背景下,充分发挥一审程序事实调查功能,明确二审监督救济审的特点,构建"锥形诉讼构造"更为合理可行。为此,证人出庭必要性审查标准需再调整。以一审程序的实质化审理为前提,通过立法彻底确立直接言词原则并切断侦查卷宗对裁判的影响,坚持诉权对出庭必要性审查的制约,压缩二审证人出庭的程序裁量空间,限制二审因事实不清发回重审的适用,以更谨慎的态度调查二审新证人。

Witnesses appearing in court is the key content of the substantive reform of criminal trial of second instance. In judicial practice, the second instance judges strictly review the appearance of the witnesses who had already received inquiries during the pre-trial and fi rst instance proceedings, while the review of new witnesses was more relaxed and the standards were different and operational. Whether the court of second instance needs witnesses to appear in court depends fundamentally on the structure of the second instance proceedings. Under the background of trial centralism reform, it is more reasonable and feasible to construct the ＂conical litigation structure＂ by making full use of the fact investigation function of the fi rst instance procedure and clarifying the function of supervision and relief of the second instance. Therefore, the necessity review standard for witnesses appearing in court should be further adjusted. Based on the substantial trial of the fi rst instance, we shall thoroughly establish the principle of immediacy and orality through legislation and cut off the impact of investigation dossiers on verdict, constraint the review of the necessity for appearing in court by the right of litigation and limit the procedural discretion, limit revocation for retrial and examine the new witnesses more carefully, so as to achieve rational allocation of fact investigation function between fi rst and second instance proceedings.