刑事庭審筆錄的實踐檢視與功能激活

我國刑事訴訟實踐中隱含著“未被激活的庭審筆錄”現象，庭審筆錄在運行中隱藏著悖論並呈現出記錄內容隨意性、形成方式壟斷性及反映庭審過程片面性等三大症狀，暴露其功能的偏差、異化和缺失。制度定位的語焉不詳、職權主義的支配邏輯及案卷筆錄中心主義的引力作用，是制約庭審筆錄功能發揮的主要成因。要激活庭審筆錄的功能，就要將其聚焦於庭審的經典場域，讓其成為庭審實質化的呈現及保障，將其置於以審判為中心的刑事訴訟體系格局，讓其成為救濟複審的信息來源，甚至將其置於以司法裁判為核心的司法體制視野，讓其成為司法責任的評鑒依據。同時，從制度供給、技術優化、專業支持及保障機制等多維度探尋激活庭審筆錄功能的具像化進路。庭審筆錄功能的激活、意義的回歸以及圍繞於此的制度改造，有可能引發刑事訴訟體系的連鎖反應，並成為撬動刑事訴訟制度變革的一個支點。

In China's criminal procedure practice, there exists an implicit phenomenon of the “inactive trial record.” The operation of trial records reveals an inherent paradox and manifests three key issues: arbitrariness in recorded content, monopolization of the recording process, and partial reflection of the trial proceedings. These issues expose the deviation, distortion, and inadequacy of trial records in fulfilling their intended functions. The primary factors restricting the effective role of trial records include ambiguous institutional positioning, the dominance of an inquisitorial logic, and the gravitational pull of dossier-centered adjudication. To activate the function of trial records, they must be refocused on the courtroom as the classic arena of trial, ensuring that they substantively present and safeguard trial proceedings. Trial records should be integrated into a trial-centered criminal procedure system, serving as a crucial source of information for remedial review. Moreover, they should be positioned within the broader judicial framework, functioning as an evaluation tool for judicial accountability. A concrete path to activating trial records requires a multi-dimensional approach, encompassing institutional reform, technological optimization, professional support, and the establishment of effective safeguards. The activation of trial records, the restoration of their substantive significance, and the systemic reforms surrounding them have the potential to trigger a chain reaction within the criminal procedure system, ultimately serving as a leverage point for broader procedural reforms.