监察程序非法证据排除规则的规范分析——以《监察法实施条例》相关条款为分析对象

Doctrinal interpretation of the exclusionary rule in supervisory investigation procedure:An analysis on the relevant provisions of the Regulation on the Implementation of the Supervision Law

监察证据具备转化为刑事证据的资格,但监察证据并不等同于刑事证据。监察非法证据排除规则独立于刑事非法证据规则而存在,但当前阶段仍需借助刑事非法证据规则弥补监察立法的不足。《监察法实施条例》作为首部监察法规,对《监察法》确立的非法证据排除制度进行了细化和完善,明确了监察机关对司法机关排除非法证据的回应义务,廓清了非法收集证据的方式,创设了非法证据的排除模式,界定了暴力和威胁的方法及限度,完善了非法证据排除的启动程序。为准确把握监察非法证据排除规则,应基于与刑事非法证据规则的融贯与衔接、强化监察内部监督及遵从制定法解释方法的立场对《监察法实施条例》第8条、第65条、第66条等条款进行解释。

Supervisory evidence can be transformed into criminal evidence, but supervisory evidence is not equivalent to criminal evidence. The exclusionary rule in supervisory investigation procedure is independent of the exclusionary rule in criminal investigation procedure. However, at present, the criminal exclusionary rule should be used as a reference to supplement the insufficiency of the supervisory exclusionary rule. The Regulation on the Implementation of the Supervision Law is the first supervision regulation. It refines and improves the system that prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence as established by the Supervision Law. It clarifies the supervisory organs’ obligation of responding to judicial organs in the suppression procedure, clarifies the meaning of illegally obtained evidence, creates the mode of excluding illegally obtained evidence, defines the methods and limits of violence and threat, and improves the procedure that starts the suppression procedure. In order to accurately apply the supervisory exclusionary rule, Article 8, Article 65 and Article 66 of the Regulation on the Implementation of the Supervision Law should be interpreted properly. Such interpretation should comply with multiple doctrines, including the integration and convergence of the criminal exclusionary rule and the supervisory rule, the enhancement of supervisory organs’ internal supervision, and the means of statutory interpretation.