刑事案件鉴定意见开示制度研究

发布时间：2018-05-09 11:58

  本文选题：刑事 + 鉴定意见　； 参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：鉴定意见是司法鉴定人运用所掌握的科学技术原理以及方法，对专门问题进行认定或解释后所出具的书面意见。对鉴定意见进行庭前开示，主要目的就是为了能更大程度上保证鉴定意见的客观、真实性，保障当事人的合法权利。这也是建立社会主义法制社会、保证司法公正的必然要求。 对于一般证据的收集来说，侦查人员在收集过程中只是对证据所展示的内容以及反映的事实加以固定，在固定过程中收集者的主观意愿对其真实性影响很小，只有收集的技术水平，环境条件等客观因素会对其造成一定的影响。而鉴定意见由于其特殊性，不可避免的将鉴定人对鉴定事项的认知能力掺杂到里面。不同的认知能力有可能导致不同的结果。其次，鉴定意见本身在认定事实方面有着十分重要的地位。它在一定程度上是鉴别、认定其他类证据是否真实、可靠的有效手段。也是其他类证据发挥证据效力的基础。并且鉴定意见的质证更加的复杂化，常人很难通过自己已有的知识对其真实性进行判断。建立刑事鉴定意见的庭前开示制度，不仅可以弥补现有法律对鉴定意见质证方面规定的不足，还可以对专家辅助人制度、法律有关重新鉴定方面的规定等其他制度加以完善，并在一定程度上提高司法效率，体现了司法的公平性、公正性。 目前我国法律的相关规定，不能有效的保证控辩双方以及法官充分的了解鉴定意见所认定的事实，笔者在对国内的相关学者有关鉴定意见开示这方面的著作进行研究的基础上，结合国外的相关制度的经验，力求建立符合基本国情，在国内切实可行的开示制度，最大限度的保护当事人的合法权益，，维护司法的权威性。为了保证鉴定意见庭前开示制度切实有效可行，我们对其加以具体的规范。首先明确其适用的范围，并不是所有的鉴定意见都需要进行开示，而且开示程序也不是一项简单的程序。其次确定参与主体，开示的时间、地点、开示的具体步骤以及鉴定意见经开示之后后续该如何处理以及如何定性。最后，建立相应的保障制度来保证其顺利运行。 本文分为四个部分。第一部分，在对相关概念进行研究的基础上，明确了鉴定意见开示制度的概念。同时介绍了现行法律上的有关规定；第二部分，主要论述了鉴定意见为什么需要进行单独的开示；第三部分，明确了鉴定意见开示的范围以及参与主体；第四部分，对国外的相关制度予以研究，取其精华；第五部分，着重论述了鉴定意见开示制度的意义；第六部分，论述了进行鉴定意见开示的具体程序与步骤。
[Abstract]:The expert opinion is the written opinion issued by the judicial expert after confirming or explaining the special problem by using the scientific and technological principles and methods. The main purpose is to ensure the objectivity and authenticity of the appraisal opinions and the legal rights of the parties. This is also the inevitable requirement of establishing a socialist legal society and ensuring judicial justice. For the collection of general evidence, the investigators only fixed the contents of the evidence and the facts reflected in the collection process, and in the fixed process, the subjective will of the collector had little effect on the authenticity of the evidence. Only the collection of technical level, environmental conditions and other objective factors will have a certain impact on it. Because of its particularity, appraiser's cognitive ability of identification is inevitably mixed into it. Different cognitive abilities can lead to different outcomes. Secondly, the appraisal opinion itself has a very important position in determining the facts. To some extent, it is an effective means to identify whether other types of evidence are true and reliable. It is also the basis for other types of evidence to play evidence. And the cross-examination of appraisal opinion is more complicated, it is difficult for ordinary people to judge its authenticity through their existing knowledge. The establishment of a pre-trial disclosure system for criminal appraisal opinions can not only make up for the deficiencies of the existing laws in providing for cross-examination of expert opinions, but also perfect other systems such as the system of expert auxiliaries, the provisions of the law relating to reappraisal, and so on. And improve the judicial efficiency to a certain extent, reflecting the fairness and fairness of the judiciary. At present, the relevant provisions of our country's laws cannot effectively guarantee that both the prosecution and the defense parties and the judges can fully understand the facts found in the appraisal opinion. The author, on the basis of studying the works of the relevant scholars in China about the expertise opinions, reveals this aspect of the works. Combined with the experience of foreign related systems, the author tries to establish a practical and practical guidance system in accordance with the basic national conditions, to maximize the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, and to maintain the authority of the judiciary. In order to ensure the practical, effective and feasible system, we regulate the system. First of all, it is clear that the scope of its application, not all appraisals need to be disclosed, and the discovery process is not a simple procedure. Secondly, the participants, the time and place of the announcement, the concrete steps of the disclosure and the subsequent treatment and qualitative analysis of the appraisal opinions are determined. Finally, establish the corresponding safeguard system to ensure its smooth operation. This paper is divided into four parts. The first part, on the basis of the research on the related concepts, defines the concept of the system of disclosure of appraisal opinions. At the same time, it introduces the relevant provisions of the current law; the second part, mainly discusses why the appraisal opinion should be issued separately; the third part, defines the scope of the appraisal opinion disclosure and the participants; the fourth part, The fifth part focuses on the significance of the appraisal opinion disclosure system; the sixth part discusses the specific procedures and steps of the appraisal opinion disclosure.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】

中国期刊全文数据库 前10条

1 彭小吉;;浅析鉴定意见的证据能力和证明力[J];福建法学;2011年03期

2 郭华;;论鉴定意见争议的解决机制[J];法学杂志;2009年10期

3 王进喜;李小恺;;论《刑事诉讼法》修改对司法鉴定活动的影响[J];中国司法;2012年09期

4 邹明理;;重新鉴定增多原因与对策研究[J];证据科学;2012年01期

5 石东洋;刘新秀;;刑事鉴定意见的证据能力审查及程序检视[J];法治论坛;2013年04期

6 邢连珠;;论刑事诉讼证据开示制度的价值[J];前沿;2010年23期

7 钱松;;鉴定意见质证程序的初探[J];中国司法鉴定;2008年03期

8 魏才发;;提高司法鉴定质量 减少重新鉴定率[J];中国司法鉴定;2008年S2期

9 申君贵;刘慧;;论刑事诉讼中的重新鉴定[J];中国司法鉴定;2009年03期

10 胡锡庆;陈邦达;;略论重新鉴定[J];中国司法鉴定;2010年02期

中国博士学位论文全文数据库 前1条

1 马鹏飞;刑事证据开示制度研究[D];中国政法大学;2009年

本文编号：1865934