Study On Construction Of Doctrine Of Discretional Evaluation Of Evidence In Contemporary China

Judicature is the last bastion of social justice, and judicial justice is the foundation on which society can be harmoniously developed. Judges exert judicial findings of fact and the enforcement of law, turning abstract justice into justice in cases. In the process of hearing a case, it is of great importance whether the case could be properly cognized. Finding of the fact is the precondition of application of law and foundation of judicial judgments. Fair judgments will be a castle in the air and justice, will have no access if findings of fact goes wrong or is distorted on purpose. Consequently, the power of doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence in rule-of-law nations was vested in judicial judges in order to ensure the proof of facts in a right way in case, which is called doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence.Doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence, namely choices or abandonment of evidence, capability of probative force and cognizance of case facts, is a evidence doctrine which is established in moral certainty by judge's conscience and free rational judgments. Doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence, as a basic principle of cognizance of facts in the litigant process, is absorbed in neoteric litigant theory and practice by many countries in the world.Building of the legal system in socialist countries is a grand social engineering. A series of expert and systemic legal provisions must be established in the situation of our country and our cultural characteristic. They constitute socilist legal system of rational structure and mulriple functions which can advance legal project and guarantee of human rights. Construction of doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence is an important part for deepening legality building and a step for judicial reform and development. It must be carried out as an important mechanism guaranteeing human rights and droits.This paper, from the historical tracing angle, reveals the development veins of doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence which are divided into the continental law system and the common law system, the two different ways, and explains that it has historical selectivity. Simultaneously, the paper inquires about the modern doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence's basic ideas and the philosophical law basis, analyzes the relationship between doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence and discretion, explains the core value of doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence, and discusses the relationship between judges and doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence: from intrinsic and external mechanisms, the two aspects, the guarantee and restraint mechanism is analyzed. By being divided into pre-the matter, in-the matter and after-the matter, the three time stages, doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence are assured to process smoothly. Through the analysis of doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence in our country's present situation and the future, flaws are pointed out in our country's reality, doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence's feasibility in our country and the value of it are analyzed, and the transformation of ideas and the design of system are suggested so as to construct our country modern doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence.We hold that doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence is an important system and mechanism for legality building, judicial reform and guarantee of human rights. It has profound philosophic base, inherent value idea, spirit and tropism in contemporary China, doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence in socialist countries should be constructed and developed, and legality building must be promoted and deepened on the basis of socialist legal ideas by studying, deriving, introducing, using for reference, transplanting, through the legal culture, the legal ideas, the value transformation, the renewal of theory, and the organic synthesis between the institutional innovations and the legal practice. We must construct proper doctrine, procedure and mechanism of discretional evaluation of evidence possessed of unifies inside and outside, standardize and restrain judges and discretion ,standardize, assure, control and supervise judges so as that they can exert jurisdiction independently and fairly, and safeguard litigant's rights and interests.