论我国司法鉴定制度的改革与完善

发布时间：2018-03-10 20:25

本文选题：司法鉴定改革　切入点：诉讼功能　出处：《山东大学》2007年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】： 近年来,法学理论界及实务界对司法鉴定的讨论不断见诸于报端,各界关于司法鉴定制度改革的呼声日渐高涨。我国现行的司法鉴定制度已经不能适应依法治国方略的要求,严重制约着诉讼制度的发展,影响了司法的公正性和权威性。 2005年2月28日,全国人大常委会通过了《全国人民代表大会常务委员会关于司法鉴定管理问题的决定》,这部法律在我国鉴定机构的设置和管理方面制定了一系列新的措施,主要特点有:一是由国家对某些种类的鉴定机构和鉴定人实行登记管理制度,二是人民法院和司法行政部门不得设立鉴定机构。至此,审判机关内部存在司法鉴定部门的历史彻底瓦解。这部法律历史性地推动了司法鉴定改革的进程,但是,这部法律的出台是“妥协”的结果,司法鉴定制度中存在的弊端并没有得到彻底的解决。由此,本文以该法律实施后的种种弊端为中心展开论述。本文分为五个部分,首先回顾了司法鉴定制度的历史发展,期待从历史缘由的角度总结我国司法鉴定制度存在弊端之根源;第二部分从人权保障功能、实现程序公正功能、发现实体真实功能三个方面对司法鉴定的诉讼功能作出了分析;第三部分对域外的司法鉴定制度从管理体制、实施制度两方面作出了比较研究,并对域外司法鉴定制度作出了分析思考;第四部分对《决定》实施后我国司法鉴定制度中存在的法律现状及原因做了分析,指出了此次改革的不彻底性以及弊端之所在:第五部分是本文的重点,首先重构了我国司法鉴定制度的整体框架:建立以鉴定人制度为主,专家辅助人为辅的司法鉴定制度。然后,利用实证分析法和比较分析法从四个层面上对鉴定制度的完善提出了自己的设想:1、在宏观层面上,建立和完善专家辅助人制度;2、程序设计上,强化鉴定机构的中立地位、重新定位侦控机关的鉴定活动;深化司法鉴定启动权改革,控辩双方可以自行委托鉴定或者通过法院委托鉴定;3、措施保障上,完善司法鉴定人出庭作证制度;建立司法鉴定法律援助制度;4、在技术层面上,积极推进司法鉴定中运用科学及司法鉴定技术的标准化建设;改革医疗事故鉴定的鉴定模式,改为统一管理的自然人负责制的鉴定机制。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the discussion of judicial expertise in the field of legal theory and practice has been constantly seen in the newspaper, and the voices of all circles about the reform of judicial expertise system are rising day by day. The current judicial expertise system in our country can no longer meet the requirements of the strategy of governing the country according to law. It seriously restricts the development of litigation system and affects the justice and authority of justice. In February 28th 2005, the standing Committee of the National people's Congress adopted the decision of the standing Committee of the National people's Congress on the management of judicial expertise. The main features are as follows: first, the state shall implement a registration management system for certain types of appraisal institutions and experts, and second, the people's court and the judicial administrative department shall not set up an appraisal organ. So far, The history of the existence of judicial expertise departments in the judicial organs has completely disintegrated. This law has historically promoted the process of the reform of judicial expertise. However, the introduction of this law is the result of "compromise", and the shortcomings in the system of judicial expertise have not been thoroughly resolved. This paper focuses on the malpractices after the implementation of the law. This paper is divided into five parts. Firstly, it reviews the historical development of the judicial expertise system, and looks forward to summing up the root causes of the drawbacks of the judicial expertise system from the perspective of historical reasons; the second part, from the function of human rights protection, realizes the function of procedural justice. In the third part, the author makes a comparative study on the system of judicial expertise from the management system and the implementation system. In the 4th part, the author analyzes the current legal situation and causes of the judicial expertise system in China after the implementation of the decision. The author points out that the reform is not thorough and the disadvantages lie in: part 5th is the focus of this paper. Firstly, it reconstructs the whole frame of our country's judicial appraisal system: establishing the system of authenticators as the main part. Then, by using the empirical analysis method and comparative analysis method, the author puts forward his own assumption of perfecting the appraisal system from four levels, at the macro level, To establish and perfect the expert assistant system, to strengthen the neutral position of the appraisal organization, to reorient the appraisal activities of the investigation and control organs, to deepen the reform of the initiation power of judicial identification, The prosecution and the defence parties may entrust the appraisal by themselves or by the court. In terms of measures to ensure that judicial experts appear in court to testify, the system of legal aid for judicial expertise shall be established and the legal aid system for judicial identification shall be established at the technical level. We should actively promote the standardization of the use of science and forensic expertise technology in judicial expertise, and reform the identification mode of medical malpractice identification, and change it into an appraisal mechanism of unified management of natural person responsibility system.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D918.9

【相似文献】