司法中的民意与专家意见书

发布时间：2018-05-18 07:42

本文选题：专家意见书 + 民意　；参考：《中共天津市委党校学报》2014年02期

【摘要】：专家意见书在我国司法实践中存在已久,虽尚未得到法律的明确认可,但已呈现出逐渐扩张的趋势。专家意见与民意既互为独立有时甚至相对立,但又相互吸收借鉴相辅相成。由于二者对于具体正义的理解不同,对于案件的事实情况掌握程度和法的规范的认识层次不同,专家意见书可以在一定程度上体现民意,但并不意味着必须总是与民意相一致。专家意见书最终的价值取向在于追求司法正义、实现司法公平,而民意往往具有道德性、非理性、易变性等特征,一份好的专家意见书应当坚持其价值追求。借鉴英美法中的"法庭之友"制度,通过明确专家意见书主体范围,规范专家意见书内容要件,实行专家意见书公开制,采用专家意见书质证制等对专家意见书进行合理规制,可以有效推动其良性发展。
[Abstract]:Expert opinion has existed for a long time in the judicial practice of our country. Although it has not been explicitly approved by law, it has shown a trend of gradual expansion. Expert opinion and public opinion are independent, sometimes even opposite, but mutual absorption and reference complement each other. Because of their different understanding of specific justice and different levels of understanding of the facts of the case and the norms of law, expert opinion can reflect public opinion to a certain extent, but it does not mean that it must always be consistent with public opinion. The ultimate value orientation of expert opinion lies in the pursuit of judicial justice and the realization of judicial fairness. However, public opinion often has the characteristics of morality, irrationality and variability. A good expert opinion should pursue its value. Drawing lessons from the amicus curiae system in Anglo-American law, by clarifying the scope of the subject of expert opinion, standardizing the content elements of expert opinion, implementing the open system of expert opinion, adopting the system of cross-examination of expert opinion and so on, the expert opinion can be rationally regulated. Can promote its benign development effectively.
【作者单位】：南京师范大学法学院;南京市中级人民法院;
【基金】：2011年度江苏省研究生科研创新计划资助项目“司法与民意”(批准号CXZZ11_0833)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D926.2

【参考文献】