鉴定结论之研究

发布时间：2018-01-23 14:28

本文关键词： 鉴定鉴定人(专家证人) 鉴定结论　出处：《中国政法大学》2006年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：随着社会的发展和科技的进步以及专业分工的细密,鉴定结论作为证据的独立种类对案件事实认定的影响越来越大,诉讼活动越来越多地依赖鉴定人(专家)特有的专门知识、经验技能和判断能力去发现真相。然而法律又担心过分依赖鉴定结论,则会出现鉴定人(专家)代替事实审理者认定案件事实的危险。因此,构建科学、合理的有关鉴定结论的程序性规则,通过一定的程序来担保或抑制其引入弊端,则成为现代立法、司法亟待解决的问题。本文共分为八个部分。它以基本概念作为研究的逻辑起点,从鉴定结论生成的缘由以及历史发展的规迹预测其未来的走向,以鉴定启动程序以及鉴定结论的生成、质证、认证、救济程序的架构作为进路,在借鉴和吸收西方成功经验的基础上,对我国鉴定结论的程序进行改造和整合,提出了完善鉴定结论程序规则的方案,为司法鉴定的立法和诉讼法的修改提供建设性的意见。第一章绪论。本章以鉴定、鉴定人和鉴定结论的范畴作为逻辑联线,通过对鉴定立法表述及其“侦查行为说”、“证据核实说”和“科技活动说”分歧的评价,将鉴定定性为“证据调查活动”。从鉴定人作为法官辅助人与证据方法的角色扮演中,分析出其角色中立与对立的原因,并预测出鉴定人由辅助人向证据方法转化的趋势。针对鉴定结论概念表述的缺陷,提出了修改为“鉴定人的意见”的立法概念。事实审理者在专门性问题上的无能与法律授权认定事实有能之间的紧张关系,以及证明责任规定与鉴定制度引入之间价值与成本的衡量,推导出鉴定结论作为独立证据种类的缘由,也为证明责任的摆脱与鉴定结论的寻求提供了理论上的理由,并进一步说明研究此问题对立法、司法以及司法鉴定制度改革的意义。第二章鉴定结论的演变历史。本章追溯了证人证言孕育鉴定结论并渐渐与其脱离的历史轨迹,以及鉴定结论与勘验、检查笔录整合而走向分化的发展历程,探讨了鉴定结论作为独立证据的历史演变。鉴定结论作为独立的证据种类被立法固定后,因其派生性引发了学者对其的争论,在肯定、否定还是改造的路径选择上,论证了固守其独立证据种类的必要性,提出了引入专家的必要性,并在鉴定实证分析的基础上,预测出鉴定扩张使人证“复活”的悄然动向以及其未来的基本走势。第三章鉴定结论的证据属性。本章对两大法系鉴定结论(专家证言)的证据能力要件进行了分析,特别是对英美法系专家证言从一般接纳法则到立法关联性
[Abstract]:With the development of society and the progress of science and technology as well as the detail of professional division of labor, the independent category of appraisal conclusion as evidence has more and more influence on the determination of the facts of the case. Litigation is increasingly dependent on the expertise, experience and judgment of experts to discover the truth. However, the law is concerned about relying too much on expert conclusions. There will be the danger of experts (experts) replacing the fact adjudicators to determine the facts of the case. Therefore, we should construct scientific and reasonable procedural rules on the conclusion of the appraisal. It is an urgent problem for modern legislation and judicature to guarantee or restrain the introduction of malpractice through certain procedures. This paper is divided into eight parts. It takes the basic concept as the logical starting point of the study, and predicts its future trend from the origin of the identification conclusions and the historical development. In order to identify the initiation process and the identification of the formation, cross-examination, certification, relief procedures as a way, on the basis of learning and absorbing the successful experience of the West, the identification of the conclusion of our procedures for transformation and integration. This paper puts forward a scheme to perfect the rules of procedure of appraisal conclusion, and provides constructive suggestions for the legislative and procedural law revision of judicial expertise. The first chapter is introduction. This chapter takes the category of identification, appraiser and expert conclusion as the logical link, through the legislative expression of identification and its "theory of investigation behavior". The appraisal of "evidence verification theory" and "science and technology activity theory" defines the appraisal as "evidence investigation activity" from the role of judge assistant and evidence method. This paper analyzes the reasons of neutrality and antagonism of its role, and predicts the trend of the transformation of appraisers from auxiliaries to evidential methods, aiming at the defects of the conceptual expression of the identification conclusions. This paper puts forward the legislative concept modified as "expert opinion". The tension between the incompetence of the fact adjudicator on the issue of specialization and the ability of the legal authority to determine the fact is put forward. As well as the burden of proof and the introduction of the identification system between the value and cost of measurement, the identification of the conclusion as an independent type of evidence reasons. It also provides a theoretical reason for getting rid of the burden of proof and seeking the conclusion of identification, and further explains the significance of the study on this issue to the reform of legislation, judicature and judicial expertise system. The second chapter of the evolution of the conclusion of the history of identification. This chapter traces the identification of witness testimony and gradually divorced from the historical track, as well as the conclusion of identification and investigation, check the record integration and differentiation of the development process. This paper probes into the historical evolution of the appraisal conclusion as independent evidence. After the conclusion is fixed by legislation as an independent evidence type, it is affirmed by scholars because of its nature. On the path choice of negation or transformation, this paper demonstrates the necessity of sticking to the types of independent evidence, puts forward the necessity of introducing experts, and on the basis of empirical analysis of appraisal. Predict the quietly trend of appraisal expansion and its future basic trend. Chapter three is the evidence attribute of the expert conclusion. This chapter analyzes the evidential ability elements of the expert testimony of the two legal systems, especially the common law system expert testimony from the general rules of admission to the relevance of legislation
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2006
【分类号】：D918.9

【引证文献】