中國刑事印證理論的再批判與超越

近年來學界圍繞印證證明展開了第二輪熱烈討論，這一輪討論的深度雖有較大的拓伸，但至今仍無合適的模式理論來準確呈現實然的中國刑事證明模式的比較法特徵及其問題。關於中國刑事證明模式的比較法理論，應當著眼於認識論維度，以明晰證明標準的比較法差異為基點，以建構推理邏輯所用的事理、證據事實、證據關係構造以及推理結論認知判斷等的類型差異為基本分析物件，並區分規範要求和實踐習慣兩個層面：在規範上，宜將常規形態稱為客觀推斷模式，區別於其他法治國家的證明標準所匹配的情理推斷模式；在實踐上，可將常見的習慣做法標識為准客觀推斷表像化-情理推斷後臺化的形態。證明模式的轉型方向應是情理推斷的一般正當化/公開化及其規範化。

In recent years a second round of discussion on the corroboration mode of proof is going on in the academic circle. The discussion has greater theoretical depth, but no theory has been produced to accurately describe the features and problems in the Chinese corroboration mode of proof from the angle of comparative law. The comparative law theory in China on corroboration should be established on the basis of proper epistemology, and start from the differences in the standards of proof in China and abroad, analyze the evidence, evidentiary relations and judgment of inference results, etc. , and distinguish legal requirements from customary practice. The legal rules require ''objective inference'', which is different from the rational inference in other countries that have different standards of proof. In practice, our customary mode of proof is ''objective inference-backstage rational inference''. Our mode of proof should evolve into justifiable/open and normalized rational inference.