精神障碍者强制医疗程序中的鉴定问题研究

发布时间：2018-03-23 22:13

本文选题：强制医疗　切入点：精神鉴定　出处：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：精神障碍者作为无力有效主张自身权益但同时又严重威胁社会公众生命和财产安全的特殊群体，其处遇问题已经成为关乎公民权利、自由和社会稳定与秩序的重大社会问题。随着我国精神障碍患者人数的增多、精神卫生事业的发展，强制医疗制度的问题凸显，我国《刑事诉讼法》修正案新增了一章专门规定刑事诉讼中的强制医疗制度，并出台了相应的司法解释。对触犯刑事法律规定但却因欠缺刑事责任能力的精神障碍者进行规制的强制医疗制度正在逐步的发展与完善。我国强制医疗制度的规定逐步清晰、逐步具体，也更加注重精神障碍者的人权保障。但是，这并不表明我国的强制医疗制度已经足够完善，其实际上仍然存在不少问题。最为突出的便是强制医疗制度中的精神鉴定问题一直处在混乱状态中，而精神鉴定在强制医疗程序中的意义和作用却是十分重大的。在司法实践中，无论是精神鉴定的性质、鉴定的内容、鉴定的主体，还是鉴定意见的司法采信问题均呈现出一种疑难与混乱的状态。刑事强制医疗程序中的鉴定，关系到是否做出强制医疗的决定，而强制医疗措施的决定关系到精神障碍者的人身自由与人权保障。因此，对强制医疗程序中的鉴定问题而言，要力求鉴定的科学准确，鉴定程序的合理严格。鉴于此，笔者深感强制医疗程序中的鉴定问题实乃急需研究和解决的重要课题。本文通过对强制医疗制度的性质与立法目的，以及精神鉴定的特征与其对于强制医疗程序的意义为基础，对精神鉴定的两个主要内容刑事责任能力和人身危险性的鉴定进行论证，认为刑事责任能力需要由精神鉴定专家作出，以精神状况、辨认能力和认识能力为主要内容，公检法机关仅对鉴定中的法律问题为精神鉴定专家提供必要的法律帮助。进而对鉴定的具体程序规制展开分析，包括鉴定的启动权配置，交由公法检机关启动，但赋予当事人方申请鉴定的权利及申请权之救济权，还包括鉴定人的资质与数量，尤其是抨击对具有较强主观性的鉴定意见适合通过多名鉴定人、多头鉴定的方式增加鉴定意见的准确性的问题。最后从鉴定意见的证据能力和证明力上论证了法庭对鉴定意见的采信规则，再次强调鉴定意见是一种独立的证据属性，，需要经过法庭的质证与认证方可采信，并且，对于多份鉴定意见的不一致，也只有通过法庭对鉴定意见的推理依据和推理过程进行推敲、质证方可最终确认鉴定意见的准确与否、采信与否的问题。此外，本文还将结合我国现有法律法规与司法实务操作，对精神障碍者刑事强制医疗中的鉴定问题提出立法与司法上的完善与落实建议。
[Abstract]:As a special group which can not effectively claim their own rights and interests but at the same time seriously threaten the safety of public life and property, the problem of mental disorders has become a matter of civil rights. Major social problems of freedom and social stability and order. With the increase in the number of patients with mental disorders and the development of mental health care in China, the problem of compulsory medical care has become prominent. The amendment to the Criminal procedure Law of our country has added a new chapter specifically providing for the compulsory medical care system in criminal proceedings. The compulsory medical system, which violates the provisions of criminal law but lacks the ability of criminal responsibility, is gradually developing and perfecting, and the provisions of compulsory medical system in China are gradually clear. Step by step, and pay more attention to the protection of the human rights of people with mental disabilities. However, this does not show that the compulsory medical system in our country is sufficiently perfect. In fact, there are still a lot of problems. The most prominent problem is that the problem of psychiatric appraisal in the compulsory medical system has been in a state of confusion. However, the significance and function of spiritual appraisal in compulsory medical procedure is very important. In judicial practice, whether it is the nature, content, subject of appraisal, Whether the judicial acceptance of an appraisal opinion presents a state of difficulty and confusion. The identification in the criminal compulsory medical procedure is related to whether to make a decision on compulsory medical treatment. And the decision of compulsory medical measures is related to the personal liberty and human rights of the mentally handicapped. Therefore, in the case of identification in compulsory medical procedures, it is necessary to strive for the scientific accuracy of identification and the reasonableness and rigour of the identification procedure. In view of this, The author deeply feels that the problem of identification in compulsory medical procedure is an important subject in urgent need of study and solution. Based on the analysis of the nature and legislative purpose of compulsory medical care system, as well as the characteristics of spiritual appraisal and its significance for compulsory medical procedures, This paper demonstrates the two main contents of mental appraisal, criminal responsibility ability and personal dangerousness, and holds that the criminal responsibility ability should be made by the expert of spiritual appraisal, with mental condition, recognition ability and cognitive ability as the main content. The Public Security Bureau, the Procuratorate, and the court organ only provide necessary legal assistance to the experts in the identification of the law, and then analyze the specific procedural regulations of the appraisal, including the allocation of the start-up power of the appraisal, and hand it over to the public procuratorial organ to start the work. However, giving the parties the right to apply for appraisal and the right to remedy the right to apply also includes the qualification and number of experts, especially the criticism that the expert opinion with strong subjectivity is suitable for passing through more than one expert. The way of multiple appraisal increases the question of accuracy of appraisal opinion. Finally, from the point of view of the evidence ability and proof power of the appraisal opinion, the paper demonstrates the rules of acceptance of the appraisal opinion by the court, and emphasizes once again that the appraisal opinion is an independent evidence attribute. It requires cross-examination and certification of the court to be accepted, and the inconsistency of multiple opinions can only be examined by the court through the reasoning basis and reasoning process of the opinion. In addition, this paper will combine the existing laws and regulations of our country with the practice of judicial practice. This paper puts forward some suggestions on the perfection and implementation of legislation and judicature on the problem of identification in criminal compulsory medical treatment for mental disorders.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】