Empirical analysis of admissibility remedies for illegally obtained real evidence and its reflection
Allowing for the remedy for the inadmissibility of the illegally obtained real evidence has made a breakthrough in the traditional mode of either this or that."Admissibility remedy"is a third path to the traditional dualistic pattern of"exclusion"and"adoption".Although it is inevitable that"admissibility remedy"will partially offset the exclusionary effect on the illegally obtained real evidence,it can meet the objective needs of finalizing cases in current judicial practice.It is necessary and legitimate to maintain such remedy when facing the present judicial reality.Based on the analysis and comparison of the judgments from 2010 to 2021,which contain the admissibility remedy for the illegally obtained real evidence,it is found that the admissibility remedy is widely applied in judicial practice,and a large number of illegally obtained real evidence has been legalized through such remedy.However,there are still prominent problems,including expansion of applicable objects,formalization of remedy method,arbitrariness in the remedy procedure,misalignment of remedy standard,and simple reasoning in the judicial judgment.In response to these problems,we should reflect on the remedies for illegally obtained real evidence,and clarify that the actual remedies for illegally obtained real evidence should be limited to reasonable interpretation.After all,an orderly operation of the admissibility remedy of the illegally obtained real evidence in the track of the rule of law can be ensured by clarifying the objects of reasonable interpretation,enhancing the legal argumentation of reasonable interpretation,standardizing the interpretation procedure,establishing appropriate standards for reasonable interpretation,and improving the reasoning mechanism of judicial documents.
Illegally obtained real evidenceDefective evidenceAdmissibility remedyReasonable interpretation
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
