日本刑事证据开示制度发展动向评析及启示

The development of the criminal evidence discovery procedure in Japan and its inspiration to China

刑事证据开示制度是庭审实质化的基本保障制度,也是落实以审判为中心的配套措施。从96年刑事诉讼法修订开始我国刑事证据开示制度逐步建立,但整体上仍呈现为强"阅卷权"弱"证据开示"的现状,刑事证据开示的理论价值并未得到应有的重视,实际上现今庭前会议中程序的繁简分流、争点整理、非法证据排除等功能的实质性作用均是以刑事证据开示为逻辑前提的自然延伸。日本刑事证据开示制度的理论、精神、内容相对成熟,2016年《刑事诉讼法》的修订着重对刑事证据开示制度再次进行完善,从日本刑事证据开示制度基础理论出发,通过分析其发展历程、趋势与最新动态,可以发现日本刑事证据开示制度逐渐从争点整理程序中脱离出来,向提高被告实质防御权方向转变。为此应结合日本刑事证据开示制度的实践经验,明确我国刑事证据开示制度的独立价值,通过充分的刑事证据开示,保障被告的知情权,降低不适时的非法证据排除对庭审效率的不利影响,在一定程度上改变其依附于庭前会议而启动的现状。

The criminal evidence discovery procedure is the guarantee of the essentialism of court heating, and also the supporting measure for carrying out centralized trial principle. Since 1996 when the Criminal Procedure Law （CPL） was revised, criminal evidence discovery procedure has established gradually. However the CPL favors ＂file reading discovery＂ more than ＂evidence discovery＂, which indicates the importance of the criminal evidence discovery procedure is overlooked. In fact, pretrial procedures, such as the separation of summary procedure from the normal procedure, organization of disputed issues, and exclusion of illegally obtained evidence, are generally a natural extension of the criminal evidence discovery procedure. The theory, spirit and content of the criminal evidence discovery procedure in Japan are relatively mature. The revision of the Japan CPL in 2016 also focused on the improvement of the criminal evidence discovery procedure. By looking into the basic theories of the criminal evidence discovery procedure in Japan, and the developing history, developing trend and the new development of Japan＇s criminal evidence discovery procedure, it reveales that the criminal evidence discovery procedure in Japan has gradually separated from the disputes arrangement procedure, and the focus of Japan CPL has shifted towards promoting the defendant＇s substantial defense rights. Learning from the practical experience of Japan＇s criminal evidence discovery procedure, reformation should be promoted in China as follows, clarifying the independent value of the criminal evidence discovery procedure, establishing thorough criminal evidence discovery procedure, protecting the defendant＇s right to prosecution＇s case, and decreasing impact deriving from ill-timed exclusion of illegally obtained evidence on trial efficiency, in order, to certain extent, to change the current situation which requires the criminal evidence discovery procedure be initiated within the pretrial conference.