中国司法鉴定制度改革研究

发布时间：2018-02-02 15:26

本文关键词： 司法鉴定程序正义制度改革　出处：《内蒙古大学》2008年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】： 司法鉴定制度改革是当前我国司法体制改革中一项亟待解决的重要课题。笔者以司法鉴定的基本原理为研究起点,在对英美法系和大陆法系主要国家司法鉴定制度的基本内容及其变化趋势考察研究的基础上,就我国现行司法鉴定制度存在的突出问题进行理论反思和实践检讨,进而结合程序正义理论较为系统地提出建立统一的司法鉴定管理体制、中立的司法鉴定机构、独立的司法鉴定人、对等的司法鉴定启动程序、透明的司法鉴定实施程序、有效的鉴定结论质证程序和规范的鉴定结论认证规则等改革思路,并就具体制度设计提出相关建议。笔者的建议是,建立一个由司法行政机关统一管理的独立于侦查、检察和审判机关的鉴定体制,限制侦查机关所属鉴定机构的职能及其鉴定结论的证据地位,最终撤销侦查机关内设的鉴定机构,切断法院对于鉴定人、鉴定机构的管理活动,以确保鉴定机构和鉴定人的中立、客观、公正;明确鉴定人的鉴定主体地位,并将鉴定人身份与侦查、检察人员身份彻底分离,完善鉴定人资格认定注册制度和法律责任体系,着力构建独立的司法鉴定人制度,以保证鉴定结论客观、公正;适应对抗式诉讼的基本要求,从平等对待双方当事人的中立理念出发,明确法院为有权启动鉴定程序的唯一主体,取消侦查、检察机关鉴定启动的决定权,赋予当事人对等的鉴定启动申请权并完善有关救济程序,明确必须交付鉴定的案件类型及情况,建立双重鉴定制度,限制当事人启动重新鉴定的次数,以杜绝鉴定启动的任意性;贯彻和落实鉴定公开原则,建立统一的司法鉴定程序制度,保障法院(法官)对鉴定活动的监督权,强化当事人对鉴定活动的参与权,完善鉴定结论的格式和内容,以保证鉴定结论的可靠性和正当性;建立鉴定结论的开示制度,强化鉴定人出庭作证制度,确立专家辅助人制度,遵循直接言词和交叉询问原则,围绕鉴定结论有无证据能力和证明力强弱,完善鉴定结论质证的范围和程序,使对鉴定结论的质证从形式质证深化到实质质证;设置非法鉴定无效、传闻证据排除、中立性、事实问题、专门性问题等规则,在赋予法官鉴定结论证明力判断充分自由裁量权的同时,明确规定法官在裁判文书中必须充分说明对证据的取舍理由,公开论证其所作裁判的合理性和正确性,以限制法官的恣意裁量。改革的最终目标是建立一个有利于维护当事人的诉讼权利,有利于保障司法鉴定质量,有利于促进司法公正的司法鉴定制度。
[Abstract]:The reform of judicial expertise system is an important subject to be solved urgently in the current judicial system reform in our country. The author takes the basic principle of judicial expertise as the starting point. On the basis of the investigation and research on the basic content and changing trend of the judicial identification system in the main countries of the common law system and the civil law system. This paper makes a theoretical reflection and a practical review on the outstanding problems existing in the current judicial expertise system in China, and then puts forward systematically the establishment of a unified management system of judicial expertise in combination with the theory of procedural justice. Neutral judicial expertise institutions, independent judicial experts, equivalent judicial identification initiation procedures, transparent judicial identification implementation procedures. The effective appraisal conclusion cross-examination procedure and the standard appraisal conclusion authentication rule and so on reform train of thought, and puts forward the related suggestion to the concrete system design. The author's suggestion is. To establish an independent appraisal system independent of investigation, procuratorial and judicial organs managed by the judicial administrative organs, and to restrict the functions of the appraisal organs and the evidential status of the conclusions of the investigation organs. Finally, the appraisal organization in the investigation organ should be abolished, and the management activities of the court should be cut off to ensure the neutrality, objectivity and impartiality of the appraisal organization and the expert body. Identify the identification of the status of the main body, and will identify the identification of experts and investigation, the identity of prosecutors thoroughly separate, improve the identification of qualification registration system and legal responsibility system. To establish an independent judicial expert system to ensure the objective and fair conclusion of the appraisal; According to the basic requirements of adversarial litigation, from the neutral concept of equal treatment of both parties, it is clear that the court is the only subject with the power to initiate the appraisal procedure, and the power of decision of the procuratorial organ to initiate the appraisal is cancelled. Endow the litigants with the right to apply for identification, perfect the relevant relief procedures, define the types and circumstances of the cases that must be delivered for identification, establish a double appraisal system, and limit the number of reappraisal initiated by the parties. To put an end to the arbitrariness of identification initiation; Implement and implement the principle of open identification, establish a unified system of judicial identification procedures, ensure the court (judges) supervision of the appraisal activities, and strengthen the parties' right to participate in the appraisal activities. Perfecting the format and content of the appraisal conclusion in order to ensure the reliability and legitimacy of the appraisal conclusion; To establish a system of disclosure of expert conclusions, strengthen the system of experts to testify in court, establish the system of expert assistant, follow the principle of direct words and cross-questioning, around the conclusion of whether there is evidence capacity and the strength of proof. Perfecting the scope and procedure of cross-examination of appraisal conclusion, so as to deepen the cross-examination of appraisal conclusion from formal cross-examination to substantive cross-examination; The establishment of illegal appraisal invalid, hearsay evidence exclusion, neutrality, factual issues, professional issues and other rules, while giving judges the power to prove the power to judge the full discretion at the same time. It is clearly stipulated that the judge must fully explain the reasons for the choice of evidence and demonstrate the reasonableness and correctness of the decision made by the judge. The ultimate goal of the reform is to establish a judicial expertise system that is conducive to safeguarding the litigant's rights, safeguarding the quality of judicial expertise and promoting judicial justice.
【学位授予单位】：内蒙古大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：D926;D918.9

【相似文献】