论文部分内容阅读
在领土主权争端的存在与解决实践中,“历史证据”被广泛且多样地使用。然而,历史证据的内涵、表现形式、法律功用和证明力要素均缺乏探讨。实际上,“回溯视角”下历史证据的参酌与采纳是领土争端的必然选择。狭义而言,历史证据指具备独立证明功用的证据类型,所证明对象限于领土的原始权利;广义上讲,历史证据具备独立或辅助的法律功用,能够被援用以直接或间接地证明领土主权的确立和变更。历史证据是对“证据”施加时间限定的结果,其表现形式不局限于古代文献,其法律功用也延展于条约解释、领土获取方式及原则的论证。就证明力要素而言,历史证据的真实性判准相对隐化,充足性成为核心标准,而对抗性则成为决定其最终证明力的关键。应当注重历史研究与法律论证的结合,从充足性和相对性角度组织与采纳历史证据,并加强特定历史证据的法律功用研究。
In the context of the existence and settlement of territorial sovereignty disputes, “historical evidence” is widely and multiply used. However, the historical evidence of the connotation, manifestations, legal functions and elements of proof are the lack of discussion. In fact, the reference and adoption of historical evidence under the “retrospective perspective” is the inevitable choice of territorial disputes. Narrowly speaking, historical evidence refers to the type of evidence that has the function of independent proof, and the evidence is limited to the original rights of the territory. In a broad sense, historical evidence has independent or auxiliary legal functions that can be invoked to directly or indirectly prove the territorial sovereignty Establish and change. Historical evidence is the result of time-limited application of “evidence.” Its manifestations are not limited to ancient documents. Its legal functions also extend to the interpretation of treaties, the methods and principles of territorial acquisition. As far as the elements of the testimony are concerned, the authenticity of the historical evidence is relatively implicit and the adequacy is the core standard, while the antagonism is the key to determining its ultimate proof. We should pay attention to the combination of historical research and legal argumentation, organize and adopt historical evidence from the perspective of adequacy and relativity, and strengthen the legal function of certain historical evidence.