包冰锋

（西南政法大学法学院， 重庆 401120）

【摘 要】公安讯问笔录于民事诉讼中的证据效力问题为司法实务界和理论界广为关注，但存在诸多争议。由于公安讯问笔录制作主体及形成过程的特殊性，学界普遍认为公安讯问笔录具有较高的司法权威，从而于民事诉讼中具有当然的证据能力且证明力较大，但其实不然。公安讯问笔录的本质是特定人对案件事实的陈述，其应归属于证人证言或当事人陈述，而非笔录证据。因此，在民事审判中，讯问笔录并不当然具有证据效力，应当对其进行实质审查，不能误以为属于笔录类证据而仅对其进行形式审查。基于此，民事法官应以自由心证主义为基点，依据民事证据规则对公安讯问笔录的证据能力与证明力进行审查判断，使其在民事诉讼领域发挥应有的效用。

【关键词】公安讯问笔录；证据能力；证明力；自由心证主义

【中图分类号】D915.13

【文献标识码】A

【文章编号】1674-1226（2019）05-0527-10

Evidence ability and probative force of the interrogation record of public security agency in civil procedure. Bao Bingfeng. Southwest University of Political Science and Law, Chongqing 401120.

【Abstract】What is the evidence effect of the interrogation record of public security agency in civil procedure? This is a widely concerned and controversial issue in academia and judicial practice. Due to the particularity of the subject and the formation process of the interrogation record of public security agency,the academic community generally believes that the interrogation record of public security agency has a high judicial authority and has the probative force in civil litigation.It ishowever not true.The essence of the interrogation record of public security agency is not a transcript of evidence but a statement by a specific person about the facts of the case,and it belongs to witness testimony or statement of the parties.Therefore, in the civil trial,interrogation records do not necessarily have competence of evidence,and cannot be considered as transcripts of evidence only for formal review.Instead,the judge should conduct a substantive examination. Hence, basing on the free evaluation of evidence, civil judges should examine and evaluatecompetence and probative force of the interrogation record of public security agency according to the rules of civil evidence.

【Key Words】Interrogation record of public security agency, Competence of evidence, Probative force, Free evaluation of evidence