摘要
Since the Civil Procedure Law and the Criminal Law have made norms against the false accusation,the corresponding judicial interpretations have been issued accordingly,forming a cross-sanction mode containing the monist law,the backing law,the civil procedure law and the criminal substantive law.However,owing to conflicts among norms in different fields of law as well as the conceptual controversy of false accusation,the current overlapping mode exposes a serious norm mismatch,thus arousing a domino effect in practice.Judging from the moderate illegal monism view of law,the adjustment scope of the false accusation is apparently narrow in the current Civil Procedure Law,but rather large in the Criminal Law.Therefore,immediate adjustments should be made to ease norm conflicts between the Civil Procedure Law and the Criminal Law,and to improve the relevant provisions of the concept of false accusation and its components in the Civil Procedure Law.In addition,only relying on the court to supervise the false accusation is outdated,it is necessary to set up a supervision mode that equally emphasizes the adjudication and prosecution,whose core is that the Civil Procedure Law strengthens investigation and verification of powers of prosecuting authorities.
继民事诉讼法与刑法针对虚假诉讼行为作出规范后,相应司法解释也陆续出台,形成了一次法与后盾法、民事程序法与刑事实体法的交叉制裁模式。但由于不同领域法之间的规范冲突以及虚假诉讼本身概念尚有龃龉,目前的交叉模式出现了严重的规范错位问题,并由此在实践中形成连锁反应。根据缓和的违法一元论法理,现行民诉法关于虚假诉讼的调整范围过窄,而刑法的调整范围过大。故应当即时调整民诉法与刑法的规范冲突,完善民诉法的虚假诉讼概念和构成要件相关规定。另外,法院单打独斗的虚假诉讼监督模式已然过时,建立"法检并重"的监督模式则为必要,而民诉法强化检察机关调查核实权的规定是其核心内容。
