“印证”证明的理论与实践

On Theory and Practice of Confirmed Attestation

对"印证"证明规范理论进行梳理,结合案例进行分析,发现造成冤假错案的根本原因是侦察机关过度依赖"印证"证明模式,为达到"相互印证"而"制造"证据;审判机关注重证据链表面上的"印证"而缺乏对证据的实质性审查。究其原因,主要是因为在未贯彻落实"以庭审为中心"的诉讼制度、书面审理的司法传统和相关规范性文件的表述存在缺陷。应提高印证证明在司法实践中的准确应用,以预防和避免冤假错案的发生。

Carding of confirmed attestation theory combined with case-based analysis suggests that false and erroneous cases are basically attributed to investigation agencies’ excessive reliance on confirmed attestation model and fabrication of evidences to attain mutual confirmed attestation. The adjudication organs place emphasis on the seeming attestation while lack of substantive examination of evidences, which is primarily attributed to failure to implement " court hearing-centered" litigation system, defective judicial tradition of written hearings and expression of relevant normative documents. Accordingly, efforts need to be made to improve correct application of confirmed attestation in judicial practice with a view to preventing and avoiding the occurrence of wrongful convictions.