监察调查与刑事侦查排除非法证据立法模式审视

The Legislative Mode of Supervision Investigation and Criminal Investigation Excluding Illegal Evidence

在监察体制改革逐步深化背景下,证据收集活动对监察委准确高效办理职务犯罪案件的重要性凸显,监察调查与刑事诉讼衔接中的证据排除适用也是具有代表性的问题之一。比较监察法和刑事诉讼法的相关立法,调查活动与侦查活动中非法证据排除规则立法模式存在明显差异。非法证据排除作为刑事诉讼中的重要证据规则立法,规则严格法定、发挥监督、制裁和保障功能是其在当前刑事司法中的特点。但审视监察法的证据规定,不仅立法内容偏少,而且存在非法证据排除规定范围模糊、权力行使与责任承担不够清晰、内部监督成效不明显等问题。比较刑事诉讼非法证据排除规则立法模式和监察调查非法证据排除规则立法模式的差异性,促进监察法和刑事诉讼法良好衔接,从而严格排除非法证据,实现公正司法目标。

Under the background of the gradual deepening of the reform of the supervision system,the importance of evidence collection activities is highlighted for the supervisory commission to accurately and efficently handle cases of duty crime, and the application of evidence exclusion in the connection of supervision investigation and criminal proceedings is also one of the representative problems. Compared with the relevant legislation of the Supervision Law and the Criminal Procedure Law, there are obvious differences in the legislative mode of the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence between the investigation activities and the investigation activities. Illegal evidence exclusion is an important evidence rule legislation in criminal procedure, which is characterized by strict legal rules, supervision, sanctions and security functions. However, when we look at the evidence provisions of the Supervision Law, we can see that there are not only a few legislative contents, but also some problems, such as the vague scope of the exclusionary provisions of illegal evidence, the unclear exercise of power and responsibility, and the ineffective internal supervision. To compare the differences between the legislative model of exclusionary rule of illegal evidence in criminal procedure and that of exclusionary rule of illegal evidence in supervision and investigation, so as to promote the good connection between the Supervision Law and the Criminal Procedure law, so as to strictly exclude illegal evidence and achieve the goal of fair justice.