司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的解決方式與完善措施
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-11-22 19:54
【摘要】： 司法鑒定結(jié)論作為法定證據(jù)之一,對(duì)各類案件的裁決具有重要、乃至決定性的影響。隨著社會(huì)生活的日趨復(fù)雜化和科技化,現(xiàn)代訴訟中需要專業(yè)人員進(jìn)行司法鑒定的問題也越來越多,鑒定在訴訟中的地位和作用也日益突出。科學(xué)公正的鑒定是保障訴訟民主、科學(xué)、公正、文明的需要。但是,由于司法鑒定活動(dòng)本身的特性及我國(guó)當(dāng)前弊端諸現(xiàn)的司法鑒定體制,司法鑒定并不總能滿足訴訟的需要,其中一個(gè)非常重要的表現(xiàn)就是司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的大量出現(xiàn)。司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧是一種多元因素的產(chǎn)物。有些分歧是由于司法鑒定所要解決的專業(yè)問題本身較為疑難所造成,因人類認(rèn)識(shí)的局限性,其產(chǎn)生不可避免;而有些分歧是由于司法鑒定相關(guān)立法的疏漏及其他外在的非合理或人為因素所導(dǎo)致,其原本是可以避免,但因立法的缺陷和滯后,這些分歧在司法實(shí)踐中不斷地的產(chǎn)生,不但損害了當(dāng)事人的利益,也最終妨礙了我國(guó)司法公正和效率價(jià)值的實(shí)現(xiàn)。若我國(guó)不針對(duì)司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧產(chǎn)生的原因采取必要的解決方式和完善措施解決并控制司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧,這不僅會(huì)阻礙訴訟的順利進(jìn)行,耗費(fèi)極大的司法資源,而且會(huì)使得司法鑒定結(jié)論這種證據(jù)形式的科學(xué)性、權(quán)威性在人們心目中大打折扣。 在實(shí)現(xiàn)司法公正,提高訴訟效率思想理念的指導(dǎo)下,本文對(duì)司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的相關(guān)問題進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)的分析和論證,并試探性地對(duì)我國(guó)的司法鑒定及相關(guān)訴訟法律制度提出幾點(diǎn)改革建議。以期能為我國(guó)解決司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧、完善司法鑒定相關(guān)法律制度,實(shí)現(xiàn)司法公正效率的目標(biāo)帶來靈感。 本文全文共三萬余字,除前言和結(jié)語,共分為三章。 第一章,司法鑒定結(jié)論概述。先明確司法鑒定結(jié)論的概念、法律特點(diǎn)、基本屬性及其證據(jù)能力。 第二章,司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧現(xiàn)象考察。首先以相關(guān)案例引出司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧這一現(xiàn)象并對(duì)其進(jìn)行界定。其次,深入地分析司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧產(chǎn)生的原因。最后,對(duì)司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧給訴訟造成的弊害及其研究意義進(jìn)行了論述和探討。以期在本章中對(duì)司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧這一現(xiàn)象有個(gè)全面的理性的認(rèn)識(shí)。 第三章,司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的解決方式與完善措施。此章是本文的重點(diǎn),筆者在對(duì)司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧理性認(rèn)識(shí)的基礎(chǔ)上,提出解決和制約司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的對(duì)策。一是制定對(duì)司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的解決方式,以使訴訟的目的順利實(shí)現(xiàn)。二是通過完善相關(guān)司法鑒定制度和訴訟法律制度來控制和減少司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的出現(xiàn)——特別是一些外在的非合理或人為因素所造成的司法鑒定結(jié)論分歧的出現(xiàn)。筆者根據(jù)相關(guān)的法律,學(xué)界的一般定論和自己的見解,袒露自己的一些看法,看問題和分析問題難免有不足之處,權(quán)作辨析,祈望指正。
[Abstract]:As one of the legal evidence, the conclusion of judicial expertise plays an important and even decisive role in the adjudication of various cases. With the increasing complexity of social life and science and technology, there are more and more problems in modern litigation that require professional personnel to conduct judicial identification, and the status and role of identification in litigation is becoming increasingly prominent. The appraisal of scientific justice is the need to guarantee litigation democracy, science, justice and civilization. However, due to the characteristics of judicial expertise itself and the current malpractice of judicial expertise system in China, judicial expertise can not always meet the needs of litigation, one of the most important manifestations is the emergence of a large number of differences in judicial expertise conclusions. The difference in the conclusion of judicial expertise is the product of multiple factors. Some of the differences are caused by the difficulty of the professional problems to be solved by the judicial expertise, because of the limitations of human cognition, the emergence of which is inevitable; Some differences are caused by the omission of the relevant legislation and other external unreasonable or artificial factors, which can be avoided, but due to the shortcomings and lag of the legislation, these differences in judicial practice continue to produce. It not only damages the interests of the parties, but also hinders the realization of the value of judicial justice and efficiency. If our country does not take the necessary solutions and perfect measures to solve and control the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise, it will not only hinder the smooth progress of the proceedings, but also consume a great deal of judicial resources. And it will make the conclusion of judicial expertise scientific and authoritative in people's mind. Under the guidance of the idea of realizing judicial justice and improving the efficiency of litigation, this paper systematically analyzes and demonstrates the problems related to the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise. Some reform suggestions on judicial expertise and related legal system of litigation in China are put forward tentatively. In order to solve the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise, improve the relevant legal system of judicial expertise, and achieve the goal of judicial justice efficiency to bring inspiration. This paper consists of more than 30,000 words, except preface and conclusion, which are divided into three chapters. The first chapter is the summary of the conclusion of forensic expertise. First, the concept, legal characteristics, basic attributes and evidential capacity of the conclusion of forensic expertise are clarified. The second chapter is the investigation of the phenomenon of divergence in the conclusion of forensic expertise. Firstly, the phenomenon of different conclusion of forensic expertise is drawn from relevant cases and defined. Secondly, the causes of the differences in the conclusion of forensic expertise are analyzed in depth. Finally, the paper discusses the harm and significance of the litigation caused by the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise. In this chapter, there is a comprehensive and rational understanding of the differences in the conclusion of forensic expertise. The third chapter, the judicial expertise conclusions of the settlement of differences and measures to improve. This chapter is the focal point of this paper. Based on the rational understanding of the conclusions of forensic expertise, the author puts forward some countermeasures to solve and restrict the differences. The first is to establish a solution to the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise, so that the purpose of the proceedings can be realized smoothly. The second is to control and reduce the emergence of the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise by perfecting the relevant judicial identification system and the legal system of litigation, especially the appearance of the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise caused by some external unreasonable or artificial factors. According to the relevant laws, the general conclusion of academic circles and their own opinions, the author reveals some of his own views, see problems and analysis of problems inevitably have shortcomings, power discrimination, hope to correct.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：D918.9
本文編號(hào)：2350382
[Abstract]:As one of the legal evidence, the conclusion of judicial expertise plays an important and even decisive role in the adjudication of various cases. With the increasing complexity of social life and science and technology, there are more and more problems in modern litigation that require professional personnel to conduct judicial identification, and the status and role of identification in litigation is becoming increasingly prominent. The appraisal of scientific justice is the need to guarantee litigation democracy, science, justice and civilization. However, due to the characteristics of judicial expertise itself and the current malpractice of judicial expertise system in China, judicial expertise can not always meet the needs of litigation, one of the most important manifestations is the emergence of a large number of differences in judicial expertise conclusions. The difference in the conclusion of judicial expertise is the product of multiple factors. Some of the differences are caused by the difficulty of the professional problems to be solved by the judicial expertise, because of the limitations of human cognition, the emergence of which is inevitable; Some differences are caused by the omission of the relevant legislation and other external unreasonable or artificial factors, which can be avoided, but due to the shortcomings and lag of the legislation, these differences in judicial practice continue to produce. It not only damages the interests of the parties, but also hinders the realization of the value of judicial justice and efficiency. If our country does not take the necessary solutions and perfect measures to solve and control the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise, it will not only hinder the smooth progress of the proceedings, but also consume a great deal of judicial resources. And it will make the conclusion of judicial expertise scientific and authoritative in people's mind. Under the guidance of the idea of realizing judicial justice and improving the efficiency of litigation, this paper systematically analyzes and demonstrates the problems related to the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise. Some reform suggestions on judicial expertise and related legal system of litigation in China are put forward tentatively. In order to solve the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise, improve the relevant legal system of judicial expertise, and achieve the goal of judicial justice efficiency to bring inspiration. This paper consists of more than 30,000 words, except preface and conclusion, which are divided into three chapters. The first chapter is the summary of the conclusion of forensic expertise. First, the concept, legal characteristics, basic attributes and evidential capacity of the conclusion of forensic expertise are clarified. The second chapter is the investigation of the phenomenon of divergence in the conclusion of forensic expertise. Firstly, the phenomenon of different conclusion of forensic expertise is drawn from relevant cases and defined. Secondly, the causes of the differences in the conclusion of forensic expertise are analyzed in depth. Finally, the paper discusses the harm and significance of the litigation caused by the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise. In this chapter, there is a comprehensive and rational understanding of the differences in the conclusion of forensic expertise. The third chapter, the judicial expertise conclusions of the settlement of differences and measures to improve. This chapter is the focal point of this paper. Based on the rational understanding of the conclusions of forensic expertise, the author puts forward some countermeasures to solve and restrict the differences. The first is to establish a solution to the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise, so that the purpose of the proceedings can be realized smoothly. The second is to control and reduce the emergence of the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise by perfecting the relevant judicial identification system and the legal system of litigation, especially the appearance of the differences in the conclusion of judicial expertise caused by some external unreasonable or artificial factors. According to the relevant laws, the general conclusion of academic circles and their own opinions, the author reveals some of his own views, see problems and analysis of problems inevitably have shortcomings, power discrimination, hope to correct.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：D918.9
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 張水勇;;民事訴訟專家輔助人芻議[J];保山師專學(xué)報(bào);2005年06期
2 吳軍;如何使司法鑒定工作面向社會(huì)服務(wù)社會(huì)[J];當(dāng)代司法;1999年11期
3 郭華;;論司法鑒定統(tǒng)一管理的困境癥結(jié)及破解路向——以全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)《關(guān)于司法鑒定管理問題的決定》為中心[J];中國(guó)司法;2007年03期
4 拜榮靜;;論司法鑒定結(jié)論在審判中的審核認(rèn)定[J];貴州社會(huì)科學(xué);2007年10期
5 王剛;略論我國(guó)民事訴訟中的專家輔助人[J];河北科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年03期
6 劉瑛;鑒定結(jié)論的審查判斷之比較研究[J];河南社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年02期
7 張永泉;論民事鑒定制度[J];法學(xué)研究;2000年05期
8 張方;從兩種鑒定類型的比較看我國(guó)司法鑒定委托權(quán)的歸屬[J];人民檢察;2000年07期
9 徐景和,王磊;司法鑒定若干論點(diǎn)評(píng)價(jià)[J];中國(guó)司法鑒定;2003年01期
10 林虎安;鑒定人出庭制度初探[J];中國(guó)司法鑒定;2003年03期
相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條
1 姜春艷 陳永剛;[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2003年
2 張學(xué)鋒 杜萌;[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2006年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條
1 梁劍;中國(guó)司法鑒定制度改革若干問題研究[D];四川大學(xué);2003年
2 劉濤;鑒定結(jié)論可靠性研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2007年
，本文編號(hào)：2350382
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/fanzuizhian/2350382.html
最近更新
教材專著
