【摘要】：隨著社會的進(jìn)步和科技的發(fā)展,刑事犯罪的科技化和智能化現(xiàn)象也日益增多,刑事司法鑒定對于探明案件真相起著越來越重要的作用。刑事司法鑒定程序的研究是近年來法學(xué)界和實(shí)務(wù)部門日益關(guān)注的一個(gè)重要問題。在刑事鑒定中,鑒定程序的科學(xué)性毫無疑問是保證鑒定結(jié)論正確的前提,鑒定的合理性也是保證鑒定結(jié)論正確的一個(gè)重要條件,且合理的鑒定程序也是審判活動(dòng)中正確運(yùn)用鑒定結(jié)論的保障。雖然我國于2005年2月28日通過了《全國人民代表大會常務(wù)委員會關(guān)于司法鑒定管理問題的決定》(以下簡稱《決定》),但現(xiàn)行的刑事鑒定程序還存在啟動(dòng)程序控辯雙方力量失衡;鑒定實(shí)施過程中缺少監(jiān)督,反復(fù)鑒定屢見不鮮;法院對鑒定結(jié)論取舍不規(guī)范等問題。因此,對我國刑事司法鑒定程序進(jìn)行研究凸顯極大的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。 本論文應(yīng)用文獻(xiàn)調(diào)查法,整理闡述了刑事司法鑒定程序相關(guān)的概念和基本理論,梳理了國外刑事司法鑒定程序的先進(jìn)經(jīng)驗(yàn),比較分析了英美法系和大陸法系的優(yōu)缺點(diǎn);應(yīng)用比較研究法,對比分析了《決定》實(shí)施前后,我國刑事司法鑒定程序在啟動(dòng)、實(shí)施、質(zhì)證等方面取得的進(jìn)展,研究中筆者發(fā)現(xiàn)《決定》實(shí)施后,我國刑事司法鑒定程序仍存在刑事鑒定啟動(dòng)程序控辯雙方力量失衡、鑒定實(shí)施過程中缺少監(jiān)督、質(zhì)證程序不完善等問題。本文應(yīng)用總結(jié)借鑒的方法,借鑒國外刑事司法鑒定程序的先進(jìn)經(jīng)驗(yàn),從刑事鑒定的啟動(dòng)、實(shí)施和質(zhì)證程序方面提出了完善我國刑事司法鑒定程序的相關(guān)建議:在重構(gòu)我國刑事司法鑒定啟動(dòng)程序方面,保留偵查階段的刑事司法鑒定啟動(dòng)權(quán)并加以完善,并確立公訴機(jī)關(guān)在這一階段的主導(dǎo)地位;同時(shí),賦予鑒定活動(dòng)當(dāng)事人的參與權(quán)。在重構(gòu)我國刑事司法鑒定實(shí)施程序方面,鑒定次數(shù)和期限實(shí)行“鑒定終局”制,規(guī)范鑒定活動(dòng)的程序及監(jiān)督管理制度,制定統(tǒng)一的鑒定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),規(guī)范刑事司法鑒定文書。在重構(gòu)我國刑事司法鑒定質(zhì)證程序方面,確立刑事鑒定結(jié)論審前開示制度和對刑事鑒定人資格及鑒定結(jié)論進(jìn)行審查的制度,并強(qiáng)化鑒定人出庭義務(wù)和責(zé)任。
[Abstract]:With the progress of society and the development of science and technology, the phenomenon of science and technology and intelligence of criminal crime is also increasing day by day. Criminal judicial identification plays an increasingly important role in finding out the truth of the case. In recent years, the research of criminal judicial identification procedure is an important issue that law circles and practical departments pay more and more attention to. In criminal identification, the scientific nature of the identification procedure is undoubtedly the premise to ensure the correctness of the appraisal conclusion, and the rationality of the appraisal is also an important condition to ensure the correctness of the appraisal conclusion. And the reasonable appraisal procedure is also the guarantee of the correct use of the appraisal conclusion in the trial activity. Although China adopted the decision of the standing Committee of the National people's Congress on the Administration of Judicial expertise on February 28, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "decision"), there is still imbalance between the power of prosecution and defense in the current criminal identification procedure. Lack of supervision in the process of implementation of the appraisal, repeated identification is common; the court is not standard to the conclusion of the appraisal, and so on. Therefore, it is of great practical significance to study the criminal judicial identification procedure in China. This paper applies the literature survey method to sort out the related concepts and basic theories of criminal judicial identification procedure, combing the advanced experience of foreign criminal judicial identification procedure, and comparing and analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of Anglo-American law system and civil law system. By using the method of comparative research, this paper compares and analyzes the progress of criminal judicial identification procedure in China before and after the implementation of "decision". In the study, the author found that after the implementation of "decision", the author made progress in the aspects of initiation, implementation, cross-examination, etc. There are still some problems in the criminal judicial identification procedure in our country, such as the imbalance of the power of the prosecution and the defense, the lack of supervision in the process of the implementation of the criminal appraisal, the imperfection of the cross-examination procedure, and so on. This paper applies the method of summing up and drawing lessons from the advanced experience of foreign criminal judicial identification procedure, starting from the start of criminal identification. In the aspect of implementation and cross-examination procedure, the author puts forward some suggestions on how to perfect the criminal judicial identification procedure in our country: in the aspect of reconstructing the criminal judicial identification starting procedure in our country, we should retain the right to start criminal judicial identification in the investigation stage and perfect it. It also establishes the leading position of the public prosecution in this stage and endows the parties involved in the appraisal activities with the right to participate. In the aspect of reconstructing the implementation procedure of criminal judicial identification in our country, the number and duration of appraisal should be carried out under the system of "final appraisal", the procedure and supervision system of identification activities should be standardized, the unified identification standard should be worked out, and the criminal judicial identification document should be standardized. In the aspect of reconstructing the procedure of cross-examination of criminal judicial identification in our country, we should establish the system of opening the criminal identification conclusion before trial and the system of examining the qualification and conclusion of the criminal expert, and strengthen the duty and responsibility of the expert to appear in court.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華南理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D918.9

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 謝復(fù)澤;論我國刑事鑒定制度的完善[D];遼寧大學(xué);2011年

2 楚圣;論我國刑事訴訟中傷情鑒定制度的完善[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2012年

3 肖露;中德刑事司法鑒定程序之比較研究[D];山東大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號：2178630