论疑罪的“中间”形式判决——关于恩里科·菲利“证据不足”判决方案的评论

恩里科·菲利主张,在悬疑案件应保持司法存疑,法官应以"证据不足"方式做出介于有罪判决和无罪判决之间的"中间"判决.菲利的观点与我国传统的"实事求是"论在原则态度上、具体方案上、是否承认选定权利上都不一样,因为他言论上支持无罪推定;它也不同于德国、法国和我国代古历史上任何存疑方案,他的方案似乎是诉讼存疑中"最好"的方案.由于它的诱惑力及与我国刑事存疑判决现实现象的关联,须指出菲利的理性不彻底--它漠视公民一般政治权利的清白假定,把无罪推定降低到心理假定的地位,无法消除我国司法界、理论界的困惑.菲利的这种"最好"的方案,其实质是在关键处放弃无罪推定,它不是真正的中间方案,不能改变推定上的"非此即彼"抉择.

On Interlocutory Judgment of Disputed Case

Enlick Filly advocates that there should remain judicial suspicion for unsettled law cases and lawyers ought to give the judgment between a guilty sentence and a sentence of "not guilty" in the way of the insufficiency of evidence.Filly's view is different from the principle of "seeking truth from facts" of China especially on the aspects of the attitude towards principles,specific programme, and the right to make a choice for he prefers the "not-guilty" presumption in words.Being the best programme in the action suspicion, his programme is, not the same as those in Germany, France and the ancient history of China.Due to its temptation and connection with the current phenomenon of the sentence of criminal doubtful points in China,it must be pointed out that with the incomplete rational it neglected the innocence presumption of citizens' common political rights,and abated "not-guilty" presumption to the psychological presumption,which has led to confusion to judicial circles and theoretical circles.Filly's best programme,in essence, renounced the presumption of "not guilty" in essence at the key points because it's not the real intermediate programme and can not change the choice of "either this or that".