专家证据运用的程序公正标准——欧洲人权法院的立场及与各国的比较

发布时间：2018-11-11 20:30

【摘要】：马迪钦娜案的判决反映出欧洲人权法院在专家证据运用问题上的完整立场,即从《欧洲人权公约》第6条第1款的"公正审判权"入手,以"平等武装"和"对抗式诉讼"两大基本原则为评判基准,系统提出涵盖专家证据生成、展示和庭上质证等环节的程序检验标准,并最终回到程序整体来综合审查专家证据的运用是否违反公正审判。该立场是在注重程序公正的国际背景下,公正审判在专家证据运用领域的具体展现,对我国鉴定意见运用的完善具有十分重要的启示意义。我国鉴定意见的运用要以此为借鉴,在坚持职权主义鉴定制度的同时,增强鉴定意见运用过程中的程序对抗性:允许辩方参与控方的鉴定过程并提出不同意见;明确控方负有完整开示鉴定意见的义务;赋予被告人要求鉴定人出庭并接受对质询问的权利;同时承认专家辅助人的部分意见具有相应的证据效力。
[Abstract]:The decision in the Maditzina case reflects the complete position of the European Court of Human Rights on the use of expert evidence, starting with the "right to a fair trial" under article 6, paragraph 1, of the European Convention on Human Rights, Based on the two basic principles of "equal armed forces" and "adversarial litigation" as the basis of judgment, the system puts forward the procedural test standards covering the production, display and cross-examination of expert evidence, etc. And finally return to the whole procedure to comprehensively examine whether the use of expert evidence violates a fair trial. This position is the concrete display of fair trial in the field of application of expert evidence under the international background of paying attention to procedural justice, which is of great significance to the perfection of the application of appraisal opinions in our country. The use of appraisal opinions in our country should be used for reference, while adhering to the authority system, strengthening the procedure adversarial in the process of application of appraisal opinions: allowing the defense to participate in the appraisal process of the prosecution and putting forward different opinions; It is clear that the prosecution has the obligation to give full disclosure of the appraisal opinion; endow the defendant with the right to require the expert to appear in court and accept the questioning; at the same time, it is recognized that some opinions of the expert assistant have the corresponding evidentiary effect.
【作者单位】：西南政法大学;
【基金】：高一飞教授主持的2014年度国家社科基金重点项目《司法公开实施机制研究》(14AFX013) 2014年度最高人民法院重大理论课题《司法领域公民知情权研究》(2014sp010) 2015年中国法学会“深入研究党的十八届四中全会精神”重点专项课题《司法公开实施状况评估和建议》(CLS(2015)ZDZX10)
【分类号】：D998.2

【相似文献】