监察证据在刑事诉讼中的衔接与排除

The Connection and Exclusion of Supervisory Evidence in Criminal Procedure

国家监察体制改革,促使了独立于立法、行政和司法的第四项基本国家权力“监察权”的形成。根据相应制度架构,原属于检察机关的绝大部分反贪职能,转由国家监察委员会行使。而国家监察委员会作为“监察机关”,其依法进行的职务犯罪调查,实质上成为刑事诉讼程序当中的一部分。监察与刑事诉讼衔接的核心在于证据的衔接。《监察法》的出台虽为二者在证据衔接方面搭建了基础性框架。但由于相关规定较为粗疏,证据衔接在实践中仍存在一定的理解分歧和适用难题,传统的刑事证据理论在理论视野、理论视角、理论内容和理论体系等方面均需进行调整或提升。

The reform of the national supervision system has led to the formation of the fourth basic state power, “supervisory power”, which is independent of legislation, administration, and judiciary. According to the corresponding institutional framework, the vast majority of anti-corruption functions originally belonging to the procuratorial organs have been transferred to the National Supervisory Commission for exercise. As a supervisory organ, the National Supervisory Commission’s lawful investigation of job-related crimes has essentially become a part of criminal proceedings. The core of the connection between supervision and criminal proceedings lies in the connection of evidence. The promulgation of the “Supervision Law” has established a fundamental framework for the connection of evidence between the two. However, due to the relatively crude regulations, there are still some differences in understanding and application difficulties in evidence connection in practice. Traditional criminal evidence theory needs to be adjusted or improved in terms of theoretical perspective, theoretical perspective, theoretical content, and theoretical system.