论文部分内容阅读
我国目前的民事诉讼质证模式主要是职权主义,与英美法系中的交叉询问制有着极大的不同,即法官主导庭审及质证,当证据的认定出现特定情况时,法官可以召集证人和当事人就他们之间或案件本身存在的问题进行调查或相互询问对质,借以发现案件真实。两者之间的不同发展背景和法律传统有着极大的关联。因此,交叉询问制是否能够引入我国民事诉讼之中,不仅仅要考虑这一制度的利弊,更应该考虑到该制度与我国诉讼实践的切合性。
At present, the mode of cross-examination in civil lawsuit in our country is mainly the power doctrine, which is very different from the cross-examination system in Anglo-American legal system. That is, the judge leads the trial and cross-examination. When a certain circumstance appears in the evidence, the judge can summon witnesses and parties They investigate the problems existing between themselves or the case itself or ask each other questions about the truth so as to find out the truth of the case. The different development backgrounds and legal traditions between the two have a great relationship. Therefore, whether cross-interrogation can be brought into civil proceedings in our country should not only consider the pros and cons of this system, but also consider the consistency between this system and our litigation practice.