印证的逻辑本质与刑事诉讼证明模式的厘定

Logic Essence of Corroboration and the Definition of the Mode of Proof in Criminal Procedure

诉讼证明模式是近年来我国法学界和实务界持续关注的热门话题。有学者将我国刑事诉讼的证明模式概括为印证证明模式,但研究表明将印证作为证明模式面临多重挑战。印证在本质上属于一种证明的方法,是逻辑学同一律、矛盾律和排中律三大定律在诉讼证明中的直观呈现和具体要求,本身只是证明的表象,而不是证明的本质,将其拔高为刑事诉讼证明模式是不科学的。刑事犯罪种类繁多,不同类型的案件需要不同的证明方法和模式与之相匹配,构建多元化的诉讼证明模式才是正解。当然,否定印证是证明模式,并不意味着贬低印证的价值和作用,而是让其回复到正确的逻辑位置,从而更好地发挥其作用和价值。作为证明的常规方法,印证在我国当下和未来的诉讼证明中仍将发挥重要作用。

The mode of proof in litigation has been a hot topic in China’s academic and practical circles in recent years.Some scholars have summarized the unique mode of proof in China’s criminal litigation as the corroboration mode of proof,but the research shows that corroboration as a mode of proof faces multiple challenges.Corroboration is essentially a method of proof,being the intuitive presentation and specific requirements of the law of identity,the law of contradiction,and the law of excluded middle.It is only the appearance of proof,not the essence of proof,and it is unscientific to elevate it to the mode of proof of criminal litigation.Criminal offenses vary,and different types of cases need different methods and modes of proof to match them,and the construction of a diversified mode of proof is the direction of the future development of the proof mode in China’s criminal litigation.Denying that corroboration is a mode of proof does not mean devaluing the role and value of corroboration;instead,it means returning it to its own logical position so that it can better play its role and value.As a conventional method of proof,corroboration will still play an important role in litigation proof at present and in the future.