从规范性质角度而言,《监察法》第三十三条第一款并不是特别授权规定,而是注意规定,主要作用是提示司法人员,监察机关已成为法定的职务犯罪调查主体,由其收集的证据材料在刑事诉讼中可直接使用。这种直接使用只是赋予监察调查证据进入刑事诉讼的初步资格,其要终局性地成为“定案根据”,还必须接受司法机关的证据审查。司法机关的审查基准有二:一是有法律效力的刑事审判关于证据的要求和标准;二是监察法中的调查取证规范。

From the perspective of normative nature, the first paragraph of Article 33 of the Supervision Law is not a special authorization provision, but a provision of attention. Its main function is to prompt judicial personnel that the supervisory organ has become the legal subject of duty crime investigation, and the evidence materials collected by it can be directly used in criminal procedure. This kind of direct use only gives the preliminary qualification that the supervisory investigation evidence enters the criminal procedure. If the supervisory investigation evidence wants to be the “final evidence”, it must be subject to the evidence examination of the judicial organ. There are two standards for evidence examination: the requirements and standards of evidence in criminal trials with legal effects; the provision of evidence collection in the supervision law.