关于司法鉴定问题的若干思考
发布时间：2018-09-11 11:22
【摘要】： 对于司法鉴定问题的研究以及重新审视,对于司法鉴定制度存在弊端的实证分析,对于造成错案、冤案的教训根源反思,能为司法鉴定制度改革的走向提供前车之鉴。鉴定制度改革当何以为进路,是引进英美法系的证人制度予以“转弯”,还是改进原有诉讼程序中的司法鉴定构造予以“直行”,是我国目前司法鉴定制度改革无法回避的问题。2005年2月28日,十届全国人大常委会第十四次会议通过的《司法鉴定管理问题的决定》(以下简称《决定》)已于2005年10月1日起正式实施。《决定》明确规定,人民法院和司法行政部门不得设立鉴定机构。根据司法鉴定活动的性质,除侦查机关为侦查犯罪提供技术鉴定支持在内部设立的鉴定部门外,其他从事司法鉴定的机构都应是独立享有权利和承担义务的社会服务性组织。这是我国司法鉴定体制的一次重大改革,《决定》通过后对我国原有的司法鉴定格局产生重大影响。笔者试图通过对司法鉴定启动权、重新鉴定、鉴定结论质证三个问题的思考,为我国司法鉴定体制的立法提供微薄之力。
[Abstract]:The study and re-examination of the problem of judicial expertise, the empirical analysis of the shortcomings of the judicial expertise system, the reflection on the causes of the wrong cases and the lessons of the injustice cases, can provide a lesson for the reform of the judicial expertise system. Why should the reform of the appraisal system be carried out? should the witness system of common law system be introduced to "turn", or should the judicial identification structure in the original litigation procedure be improved to be "directly carried out"? Is the current judicial expertise system reform can not be evaded. February 28, 2005, The decision on the Administration of Forensic expertise (hereinafter referred to as "the decision"), adopted by the 14th session of the Tenth National people's Congress standing Committee (hereinafter referred to as "the decision"), has been formally implemented since October 1, 2005. The people's court and the judicial administrative department shall not set up an appraisal organ. According to the nature of judicial expertise activities, except for the technical identification support provided by investigative organs for the investigation of crimes, the other institutions engaged in judicial expertise should be independent social service organizations which enjoy rights and undertake obligations. This is a major reform of the judicial expertise system in our country. After the adoption of the decision, it has a great impact on the original pattern of judicial expertise in our country. The author tries to provide a meagre force for the legislation of the judicial expertise system by thinking of three problems: the right to start the judicial identification, the reappraisal and the cross-examination of the appraisal conclusion.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D926;D918.9
本文编号：2236554
[Abstract]:The study and re-examination of the problem of judicial expertise, the empirical analysis of the shortcomings of the judicial expertise system, the reflection on the causes of the wrong cases and the lessons of the injustice cases, can provide a lesson for the reform of the judicial expertise system. Why should the reform of the appraisal system be carried out? should the witness system of common law system be introduced to "turn", or should the judicial identification structure in the original litigation procedure be improved to be "directly carried out"? Is the current judicial expertise system reform can not be evaded. February 28, 2005, The decision on the Administration of Forensic expertise (hereinafter referred to as "the decision"), adopted by the 14th session of the Tenth National people's Congress standing Committee (hereinafter referred to as "the decision"), has been formally implemented since October 1, 2005. The people's court and the judicial administrative department shall not set up an appraisal organ. According to the nature of judicial expertise activities, except for the technical identification support provided by investigative organs for the investigation of crimes, the other institutions engaged in judicial expertise should be independent social service organizations which enjoy rights and undertake obligations. This is a major reform of the judicial expertise system in our country. After the adoption of the decision, it has a great impact on the original pattern of judicial expertise in our country. The author tries to provide a meagre force for the legislation of the judicial expertise system by thinking of three problems: the right to start the judicial identification, the reappraisal and the cross-examination of the appraisal conclusion.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D926;D918.9
【引证文献】
相关期刊论文 前1条
1 项勇;徐纯厚;;浅议刑事司法鉴定应完善的几个问题[J];法制与经济(中旬);2012年06期
相关硕士学位论文 前3条
1 李盼盼;论我国人身伤残鉴定制度的完善[D];燕山大学;2012年
2 沈文征;论我国司法鉴定启动程序的适用与完善[D];苏州大学;2011年
3 李艳超;刑事司法鉴定启动程序研究[D];吉林大学;2010年
，本文编号：2236554
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/gongan/2236554.html
