本文選題：司法鑒定　切入點：司法鑒定管理權(quán)　出處：《湘潭大學(xué)》2007年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 隨著現(xiàn)代科學(xué)技術(shù)的發(fā)展,在辨別案件事實真?zhèn)蔚姆椒ㄉ?司法鑒定已經(jīng)占據(jù)了越來越重要的位置。在司法鑒定過程中主觀的人為因素是左右鑒定結(jié)論的重要原因,所以改革司法鑒定制度其重點應(yīng)放在對人員組織制度的改革上。雖然近年來我國的司法鑒定管理體制有了一定的進步,但是也還存在著許多問題。例如,鑒定機構(gòu)繁多,缺乏統(tǒng)一管理;鑒定機構(gòu)、鑒定人準(zhǔn)入制度不完善,水平參差不齊等問題;所以出現(xiàn)了許多重復(fù)鑒定、多頭鑒定、錯誤鑒定現(xiàn)象。針對于這些問題,全國人民代表大會常務(wù)委員會于2005年2月28日通過、頒布了《全國人大常委會關(guān)于司法鑒定管理問題的決定》(以下簡稱《決定》),《決定》的頒布實施無疑對我國司法鑒定工作起了巨大的推動作用。但是《決定》沒有解決我國司法鑒定中的諸多問題,《決定》實施了一年多時間,現(xiàn)在逐步演變成了新的分散的司法管理體制,即司法部、公安部、最高人民檢察院三機關(guān)的三套管理機制。文章對《決定》實施后的狀況及現(xiàn)實意義作了一定評價,同時指出《決定》實施后尚未解決的有關(guān)管理體制問題。通過深入分析,文章認為我國的司法鑒定管理體制改革不能脫離客觀實際。應(yīng)統(tǒng)一、落實《決定》精神,由司法行政部門統(tǒng)一管理司法鑒定人和司法鑒定機構(gòu),對偵查機關(guān)的鑒定人、鑒定機構(gòu)實行雙重管理。同時完善與司法鑒定有關(guān)的法律制度,實現(xiàn)行業(yè)管理規(guī)范化。實現(xiàn)對鑒定人的責(zé)任制度,在鑒定機構(gòu)內(nèi)部形成權(quán)利義務(wù)對等。
[Abstract]:With the development of modern science and technology, judicial expertise has occupied a more and more important position in the method of distinguishing the truth and falsehood of cases. Therefore, the focus of the reform of the judicial expertise system should be on the reform of the personnel organization system. Although there has been some progress in the management system of judicial expertise in China in recent years, there are still many problems. For example, there are many appraisal institutions. Lack of unified management; identification institutions, appraisers access system is not perfect, the level is not uniform; so there have been a lot of repeated identification, long identification, false identification phenomenon. In view of these problems, Adopted by the standing Committee of the National people's Congress on February 28th 2005, The promulgation of the decision of the standing Committee of the National people's Congress on the Administration of Judicial expertise (hereinafter referred to as "decision") has undoubtedly played a great role in promoting the work of judicial expertise in China. To solve many problems in judicial expertise in China, the "decision" has been implemented for more than a year. Now it has gradually evolved into a new decentralized judicial management system, that is, three sets of management mechanisms of the three organs of the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Supreme people's Procuratorate. At the same time, the paper points out that the relevant management system problems have not been solved after the implementation of the decision. Through in-depth analysis, the article holds that the reform of the judicial appraisal management system in our country cannot be divorced from the objective reality, and should be unified and implemented in the spirit of "decision". The judicial administrative department shall unify the management of judicial experts and judicial expertise institutions, and exercise dual management over experts and appraisal organs of investigative organs, and at the same time improve the legal system relating to judicial expertise, To realize the standardization of industry management, to realize the responsibility system to the appraiser, and to form the equivalence of rights and obligations within the appraisal organization.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2007
【分類號】：D918.9

【引證文獻】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王蕾;論我國刑事訴訟中鑒定人的民事責(zé)任[D];湘潭大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：1627255