Abstract

Law is in nature an evaluation of conflicting interests; the application of legal rules is paraphrasing inherent value-judgment of law, and value-balancing is indispensable in order to make up for the incapability of formal reasoning. Therefore, law not only reflects value-preferences on the ontology level of what it is, but also embeds value-calculation on the methodological level of how it is applied. Evidence rules, as an important part of legal system, certainly have their own value foundation. Fact-finding is an epistemic activity in court, and fact-finder determines facts through the “mirror of evidence”. Therefore, evidence rules which regulate the process of fact-finding can be seen as ‘court epistemology’. The pursuit of truth and pursuit of value together constitute the justifications for establishing certain evidence rules, and these are reflected in evidence rules’ value basis. Evidence rules shall represent the values shared by the great majority of people. Among these fundamental values, the four most universal ones are accuracy, justice, harmony and efficiency, which constitute the value-backbones of evidence law. The Four Value-Backbones serve as guiding standards for evidentiary legislation. They are also the criteria for applying evidence rules, and may effectively control judges’ judicial discretion in evidentiary adjudication.