证明困难视阈下的事实认定与刑事推定

从法律效果上看,刑事推定实际具有实体与程序的双重功能。以“主观罪责型”推定与“证明责任型”推定为例,前者改变了构成要件中主观罪责的证明方式,后者则在此基础上,将有限的举证责任转由被告人承担,使其成为刑事推定的不利方。为在不违背罪刑法定原则与无罪推定原则的前提下,充分实现刑事推定所预想的制度目标,不但需要对其基础事实之内容予以严格限定,突出其法定性与可证明性,而且需要明确推定事实与裁判事实之间的合理界分,强调事实认定者的心证对推定结果的可能影响,并在适用前提上,仅将刑事推定作为证明困难处境下的末位选择加以使用,在作用范围方面可将其适当扩大至定罪外的部分量刑情节。在立法选择上,考虑到刑事诉讼人权保障的基本立场,刑事立法应当对刑事推定保持最低限度的容忍态度,尽量减少其创设及适用。

Fact Finding and Criminal Presumption from the Perspective of Difficulties in Proof

In terms of the legal effect,the criminal presumption actually has both substantive and procedural functions.Taking the presumption of"subjective guilty"and the presumption of"burden of proof"as examples,the former changes the method of proving the subjective guilt in the constituent elements,while the latter transfers the limited burden of proof to the defendant based on the former,thus making the defendant become an adverse party of the criminal presumption.Therefore,in order to fully realize system goals envisaged by criminal presumption under the premise of not violating the principle of legality and the principle of presumption of innocence,it is necessary not only to strictly limit the content of its basic facts and highlight its legality and provability,,but also to make a clear division between the presumptive facts and the facts for judgment and highlight the possible influence of the discretion of the fact finder on the presumptive result.Furthermore,in terms of the application preconditions,the criminal presumption is only adopted as the last choice in the situation of having difficulties in proof,and in terms of the application scope,it may be appropriately extended to some sentencing circumstances in addition to those regarding conviction.With regard to the choice of legislation,taking into account the basic position of human rights protection in criminal proceedings,criminal legislation should maintain a minimum tolerance for criminal presumption and minimize its creation and application.