大数据证据的法律审视及算法规制探析

Analysis of legal review and algorithm regulation of big data evidence

大数据推动了证据体系“本”的提升和“质”的嬗变。司法审判中,既可以运用“大数据证据”办“大体量案件”,推进审判体系和审判能力升华;也可以实现证据体系由海量数据所包围、以算法驱动智慧庭审的新样态。对于大数据证据在审判中的定位,相关学说观点在理论与实务中大相径庭。鉴于大数据复杂海量的特点,不应纠结于证据种类的划分,而应将其看作辅助判断证据的形式要素。在弱人工智能时代,大数据证据的运用面临着两层难题,一是取证、质证等环节存在的问题;二是在刑事审判过程中,由于数据本身具有的算法歧视、非透明等特点,大数据与证据耦合易引发潜在风险。在庭审中,对大数据应当精用慎用,构建“鉴—取—审”一体的证据审查体系;同时,搭建数据信任的桥梁,厘定获取大数据证据的“有限第三方”理论,设置特定指向的公开披露,为算法信任设置正确导向,积极发挥大数据在各审判阶段的价值效能,完善其介入刑事证据体系的逻辑合理性,更好地促进未来证据体系的发展变革。

Big data promotes the improvement of the“base”and the evolution of the“quality”for the evidence system.In judicial trials,“big data evidence”can be used to handle“large-volume cases”and promote the sublimation of the trial system and trial capabilities;it can also realize a new style in which the evidence system is surrounded by massive data and the smart trials are driven by algorithm.Regarding the positioning of big data evidence in trials,relevant doctrinal views are quite different in theory and practice.In view of the complex and massive characteristics of big data,we should not be obsessed with the classification of evidence types,but should regard them as formal elements that assist in the judgment of evidence.In the era of weak artificial intelligence,the use of big data evidence faces two difficulties.First,there are problems in evidence collection and cross-examination.Secondly,in the criminal trial process,due to the algorithmic discrimination and non-transparency of the data itself,the coupling of big data and evidence can easily lead to potential risks.In court trials,big data should be used carefully and prudently,and an evidence review system integrating“appraisal-acquisition-examination”should be built;at the same time,a bridge of data trust should be built,a limited“third-party theory”for obtaining big data evidence should be determined and specific-directed public disclosure should be set to set the right direction for algorithm trust,to actively leverage the value and effectiveness of big data in various trial stages,improve the logical rationality of its intervention in the criminal evidence system and better promote the development and reform of the future evidence system.