循证视角下的大数据法治决策证据转化研究
|
摘要
方兴未艾的互联智能大数据时代,引爆了传统法学领域内科学研究与法治决策内外部关系的重构,使得法学学术范式的转型与法治决策流程的再造变得迫在眉睫。如何认识法治决策与决策证据尤其是循证证据之间的关系及两者的历史流变;如何实现大数据时代决策证据的规范有效转化,法循证学方法又如何扬长避短地发挥其应有的功能等问题,就成了明确法循证学内涵与外延后业界需着力思考和解决的问题。文章以决策证据的循证使用/消费为核心,为法循证学方法在汉语法学与法治实践中的运用初步总结出一个能够与传统法学方法实现功能衔接的学科新工具,描摹出一个由浅入深、色谱递进的法循证学方法领地,概括出一个基本的法循证学方法使用流程。
In the burgeoning era of interconnected intelligent big data, the reconstruction of internal and external relations between scientific research and legal decision-making have been triggered in the field of law, which makes the transformation of academic paradigm of law and the reconstruction of decision-making process under the rule of law extremely urgent. How to understand the relationship between decision-making under rule of law and its evidences, especially evidence-based evidences, and its historical evolution; How to get and transform evidences into evidence-based decision-making in the era of big data; how to make full use of the strengths and circumvent weaknesses of the evidence-based approach in order to play its due role in it, have become the main focus of this paper on the basis of defining the connotation and extension of the evidence-based law in our previous study. The paper aims to sum up a preliminary and practical evidence-based approach which can cohere functionally with traditional methodology of jurisprudence, and mimic a chromatographic domain of scope for evidence-based law, and outlines the basic process for the evidence-based law approach in the context of the rule of law with Chinese characteristics.
In the burgeoning era of interconnected intelligent big data, the reconstruction of internal and external relations between scientific research and legal decision-making have been triggered in the field of law, which makes the transformation of academic paradigm of law and the reconstruction of decision-making process under the rule of law extremely urgent. How to understand the relationship between decision-making under rule of law and its evidences, especially evidence-based evidences, and its historical evolution; How to get and transform evidences into evidence-based decision-making in the era of big data; how to make full use of the strengths and circumvent weaknesses of the evidence-based approach in order to play its due role in it, have become the main focus of this paper on the basis of defining the connotation and extension of the evidence-based law in our previous study. The paper aims to sum up a preliminary and practical evidence-based approach which can cohere functionally with traditional methodology of jurisprudence, and mimic a chromatographic domain of scope for evidence-based law, and outlines the basic process for the evidence-based law approach in the context of the rule of law with Chinese characteristics.
引文
[1]刘品新.网络法学[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2009.
[2]马海群,王巍,刘焕.信息法学[M].北京:科学出版社,2002.
[3]张楚.电子商务法[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[4]陈亮.人工智能法学学科建设中遇到的三个问题[N].人民法院报,2018-07-04(5).
[5]杨继文.从实验法学到智能法学[N].检察日报,2018-12-18(3).
[6]刘光华.法循证学:法学和循证科学的交叉领域与方法[J].图书与情报,2018(3):17-23,55.
[7]张妮,蒲亦非.计算法学导论[M].成都:四川大学出版社,2015.
[8]李泽厚.历史本体论[M].北京:三联书店,2002:1-9.
[9]刘光华.美国经济法的域外适用及其对我国立法的启示[J].兰州大学学报(社科版),1997(4):68-73.
[10]Mattei U.Three Patterns of Law:Taxonomy and Change in the World's Legal Systems[J].American Journal of Comparative Law,1997,45(1):5-44.
[11]犯罪与司法专题系统评价报告[EB/OL].[2018-12-18].https://www.campbellcollaboration.org/library.html.
[12](德)乌尔里希·贝克尔.何博闻,译.风险社会[M].南京:译林出版社,2004:1-11.
[13]刘光华.经济法的分析实证基础[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008:242-259.
[14]杨克虎,李秀霞,拜争刚.循证社会科学研究方法:系统评价与Meta分析[M].兰州:兰州大学出版社,2018:317.
[15]魏丽莉,张晶,斯丽娟,等.循证经济学的逻辑推演、范式变革与发展前景[J].图书与情报,2018(3):28-34.
[16]苏力.法治及其本土资源[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004:3-22.
[17]傅华.论循证新闻的方法与意义---一种媒体融合背景下新闻生产方式创新[J].中国记者,2016(6):27-29.
[18]余成峰.法律的“死亡”:人工智能时代的法律功能危机[J].华东政法大学学报,2018(2):6-21.
[19]王登辉.大数据研究方法应用于刑事法学的冷思考[J].西南政法大学学报,2016(6):22-29.
[20]杨克虎.循证社会科学的产生、发展与未来[J].图书与情报,2018(3):1-10.
(1)所谓“毒树之果”,是美国刑事诉讼中对某种证据所作的一个形象化概括,意指“根据以刑讯逼供等非法手段所获得的犯罪嫌疑人、刑事被告人的口供,所获得的第二手证据(派生性证据)”。以非法手段所获得的口供是毒树,而以此所获得的第二手证据则是毒树之果。上世纪六十年代美国联邦最高法院以微弱优势正式确立了刑事司法的“毒树之果”规则---“美国联邦政府机构违反美国宪法规定所取得的证据材料,在审判中不具有证明力”。“毒树之果”原则作为非法证据排除的规则,对遏制办案人员刑讯逼供,保护刑事被告人的基本权利有着进步意义。
(2)《十二怒汉》(12 Angry Men)是由美国米高梅公司于1957年制作的一部黑白电影,它讲述了一个在贫民窟中长大的男孩被指控谋杀生父,案件的旁观者和凶器均以铁证呈堂,而担任此案陪审团的12个人要于案件结案前,在陪审团休息室里讨论案情,为法官裁判结案提供一致性陪审团意见的故事。
[2]马海群,王巍,刘焕.信息法学[M].北京:科学出版社,2002.
[3]张楚.电子商务法[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[4]陈亮.人工智能法学学科建设中遇到的三个问题[N].人民法院报,2018-07-04(5).
[5]杨继文.从实验法学到智能法学[N].检察日报,2018-12-18(3).
[6]刘光华.法循证学:法学和循证科学的交叉领域与方法[J].图书与情报,2018(3):17-23,55.
[7]张妮,蒲亦非.计算法学导论[M].成都:四川大学出版社,2015.
[8]李泽厚.历史本体论[M].北京:三联书店,2002:1-9.
[9]刘光华.美国经济法的域外适用及其对我国立法的启示[J].兰州大学学报(社科版),1997(4):68-73.
[10]Mattei U.Three Patterns of Law:Taxonomy and Change in the World's Legal Systems[J].American Journal of Comparative Law,1997,45(1):5-44.
[11]犯罪与司法专题系统评价报告[EB/OL].[2018-12-18].https://www.campbellcollaboration.org/library.html.
[12](德)乌尔里希·贝克尔.何博闻,译.风险社会[M].南京:译林出版社,2004:1-11.
[13]刘光华.经济法的分析实证基础[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2008:242-259.
[14]杨克虎,李秀霞,拜争刚.循证社会科学研究方法:系统评价与Meta分析[M].兰州:兰州大学出版社,2018:317.
[15]魏丽莉,张晶,斯丽娟,等.循证经济学的逻辑推演、范式变革与发展前景[J].图书与情报,2018(3):28-34.
[16]苏力.法治及其本土资源[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004:3-22.
[17]傅华.论循证新闻的方法与意义---一种媒体融合背景下新闻生产方式创新[J].中国记者,2016(6):27-29.
[18]余成峰.法律的“死亡”:人工智能时代的法律功能危机[J].华东政法大学学报,2018(2):6-21.
[19]王登辉.大数据研究方法应用于刑事法学的冷思考[J].西南政法大学学报,2016(6):22-29.
[20]杨克虎.循证社会科学的产生、发展与未来[J].图书与情报,2018(3):1-10.
(1)所谓“毒树之果”,是美国刑事诉讼中对某种证据所作的一个形象化概括,意指“根据以刑讯逼供等非法手段所获得的犯罪嫌疑人、刑事被告人的口供,所获得的第二手证据(派生性证据)”。以非法手段所获得的口供是毒树,而以此所获得的第二手证据则是毒树之果。上世纪六十年代美国联邦最高法院以微弱优势正式确立了刑事司法的“毒树之果”规则---“美国联邦政府机构违反美国宪法规定所取得的证据材料,在审判中不具有证明力”。“毒树之果”原则作为非法证据排除的规则,对遏制办案人员刑讯逼供,保护刑事被告人的基本权利有着进步意义。
(2)《十二怒汉》(12 Angry Men)是由美国米高梅公司于1957年制作的一部黑白电影,它讲述了一个在贫民窟中长大的男孩被指控谋杀生父,案件的旁观者和凶器均以铁证呈堂,而担任此案陪审团的12个人要于案件结案前,在陪审团休息室里讨论案情,为法官裁判结案提供一致性陪审团意见的故事。