我國刑事證明標準的反思

Rethinking of Our Criminal Standard of Proof

新刑事訴訟法移植了英美法系的“排除合理懷疑”證明標準，並將其作為“證據確實充分”證明標準的組成部分。然而，“證據確實充分”的證明標準仍然以“融貫論”作為“真實”的標準，有未肅清的客觀真實情結。融貫只是案件事實“真實”的必要條件，而非充分必要條件。“排除合理懷疑”與“證據確實充分”在真理觀和價值觀方面大異其趣。我國證明標準應從“融貫論”標準向“真”之信念觀、從價值中立向道德責任、從實證主義向社會構建論轉變。

“Beyond Reasonable Doubt” is integrated into the standard of“unquestionable and sufifcient evidences” in the revised cirminal procedural law. But we set up Coherentism as the standard of case facts. This is a complex of uncleared objective truth. Coherence is requirement of truth of case facts, not necessary and sufifcient condition. The standard of beyond reasonable doubt is very different from that of unquestionable and sufifcient evidences in the respect of the view of truth and values. We should turn Coherence Theory of Truth to the belief idea of truthlikeness, change value neutrality into moral responsibility notion, convert positivism into social constructionalism concept.