本文選題：鑒定人 + 鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)�。� 參考：《安徽大學(xué)》2006年碩士論文

【摘要】： 在我國(guó)現(xiàn)有的司法制度中，司法鑒定制度是其重要組成部分，在現(xiàn)代訴訟中發(fā)揮著越來(lái)越重要作用。我國(guó)的法律制度屬于典型的大陸法系，司法鑒定人一直被認(rèn)為是“法院輔助人員”或“法官的助手”。隨著高科技知識(shí)的應(yīng)用，科學(xué)的不確定性和偽科學(xué)問題都曾出現(xiàn)在法庭的證據(jù)之中，也為法官審查判斷證據(jù)提出了新的難題。為此法官不得不借助于專家的分析、判斷，司法鑒定人、鑒定專家又被視為“科學(xué)的法官”，司法鑒定結(jié)論會(huì)對(duì)審判結(jié)果影響很大。我國(guó)的司法鑒定制度誕生于新中國(guó)剛成立后，早期受前蘇聯(lián)制度影響很大，有明顯的計(jì)劃經(jīng)濟(jì)的特征。改革開放以后，伴隨著社會(huì)主義法制的完善，人們的法律意識(shí)不斷加強(qiáng)，參與訴訟活動(dòng)日趨頻繁，訴訟糾紛的數(shù)量也直線上升，導(dǎo)致對(duì)司法鑒定的需求逐漸增多。由于我國(guó)至今還沒有一部專門規(guī)范司法鑒定方面的法律，使司法鑒定缺乏統(tǒng)一的規(guī)劃與管理，缺乏部門之間的相互協(xié)調(diào)與協(xié)作，導(dǎo)致現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中出現(xiàn)“多頭鑒定”、“重復(fù)鑒定”，使得案件審理難以順利進(jìn)行，訴訟長(zhǎng)期處在不穩(wěn)定狀態(tài)，無(wú)法及時(shí)解決糾紛。 文章首先對(duì)司法鑒定的基本概念進(jìn)行分析，總結(jié)了司法鑒定的主要特征，如科學(xué)性、合法性、獨(dú)立性、多樣性、被動(dòng)性。在介紹兩大法系關(guān)于司法鑒定的法律規(guī)定、鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)的設(shè)置與管理、鑒定人的選任方式的基礎(chǔ)上，通過比較分析，提出國(guó)外法律制度中值得我國(guó)立法中借鑒的部分，以彌補(bǔ)我國(guó)現(xiàn)有法律規(guī)范的不足。 文章通過對(duì)我國(guó)現(xiàn)行司法鑒定制度的剖析，指出其存在的問題主要是：司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)缺少全國(guó)統(tǒng)一的組織、協(xié)調(diào)和管理；缺乏統(tǒng)一的司法鑒定人資格認(rèn)證制度、管理制度和監(jiān)督制度；缺少全面的、統(tǒng)一的司法鑒定程序規(guī)定；司法鑒定人員出庭作證制度不健全；缺乏統(tǒng)一的司法鑒定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)等。由于我國(guó)現(xiàn)行的司法制度存在著這些方面的問題，造成了一些案件久拖不決，使審理難以進(jìn)行，影響了司法公正，降低了司法的威信。 文章指出，我國(guó)司法鑒定制度重構(gòu)是符合效率和效益的要求，，是適應(yīng)我國(guó)客觀形勢(shì)發(fā)展的需要，是建立社會(huì)主義法治的需要。司法鑒定制度改革是目前形勢(shì)的迫切需求，但在進(jìn)行制度的重構(gòu)過程中，一定要遵循法治原則；吸收借鑒與適 合我國(guó)國(guó)情的原則：提高效率與效益的原則；公正、公開的原則；科學(xué)原則；獨(dú)立原則。文章就我國(guó)司法鑒定制度的重構(gòu)提出了以下建議，即建立鑒定人、鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)的名冊(cè)制度；建立合理的司法鑒定程序制度；建立司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)和鑒定人的法律責(zé)任追究制度；完善鑒定人出庭作證制度；取消法院、檢察院系統(tǒng)的鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)，整合鑒定資源，逐步建立“一元化的三級(jí)”專職司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)；建立一套完整的鑒定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)體系。
[Abstract]:In the current judicial system of our country, the judicial expertise system is an important part of it and plays an increasingly important role in modern litigation. Our country's legal system belongs to the typical civil law system, the judicial expert is always regarded as "the assistant of the court" or "the assistant of the judge". With the application of high-tech knowledge, the uncertainty of science and pseudoscience problems have appeared in the evidence of the court, and also put forward a new problem for the judge to examine and judge the evidence. For this reason, judges have to rely on the analysis of experts to judge that judicial experts and experts are regarded as "scientific judges". The conclusion of judicial expertise will have a great impact on the trial results. The judicial identification system of our country was born after the founding of New China. It was greatly influenced by the former Soviet Union system in the early period and had the characteristic of planned economy. After the reform and opening up, with the improvement of the socialist legal system, people's legal consciousness is constantly strengthened, the participation in litigation activities is becoming more and more frequent, the number of litigation disputes is also rising in a straight line, which leads to the increasing demand for judicial expertise. There is not a special law on judicial expertise in our country, which makes the judicial expertise lack of unified planning and management, lack of coordination and cooperation among departments, leading to the emergence of "long identification" in real life. "repeated appraisal" makes it difficult for the case to proceed smoothly, and the lawsuit is in a state of instability for a long time, and the dispute can not be resolved in time. This paper first analyzes the basic concepts of forensic expertise and summarizes the main characteristics of forensic expertise, such as science, legitimacy, independence, diversity, passivity. Based on the introduction of the legal provisions on judicial expertise, the establishment and management of appraisal institutions and the selection and appointment of experts in the two legal systems, this paper, through comparative analysis, puts forward the parts of the foreign legal system that are worthy of reference in our legislation. In order to make up for the lack of existing legal norms in China. Through the analysis of the current judicial identification system in China, the paper points out that the existing problems are: the lack of unified organization, coordination and management of the judicial expertise institutions, the lack of a unified system of accreditation of judicial experts, the lack of a unified system of accreditation of judicial experts, and the lack of a unified system of accreditation of judicial experts. Management system and supervision system; lack of comprehensive and unified rules of judicial identification procedures; imperfect system of judicial experts to testify in court; lack of unified standards of judicial expertise. Because of these problems existing in our country's current judicial system, some cases are delayed, so that the trial is difficult to carry out, which affects the judicial justice and reduces the prestige of the judicature. The article points out that the reconstruction of judicial expertise system in our country is in line with the requirements of efficiency and benefit, is the need to adapt to the development of the objective situation of our country, and is the need to establish the socialist rule of law. The reform of judicial appraisal system is the urgent need of the current situation, but in the process of system reconstruction, we must follow the principle of rule of law; The principles of absorbing and adapting to the situation of our country include the principle of improving efficiency and benefit; the principle of justice and openness; the principle of science; the principle of independence. The article puts forward the following suggestions on the reconstruction of the judicial identification system in our country, namely, establishing the system of experts, the register system of the appraisal institution, the establishment of the reasonable judicial identification procedure system, the establishment of the system of investigating the legal responsibility of the judicial expert institution and the expert body; It is necessary to perfect the system of expert testimony in court, abolish the system of appraising organs of court and procuratorate, integrate the resources of appraisal, and gradually establish a specialized judicial appraisal institution of "unified three-level", and establish a set of complete appraisal standard system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2006
【分類號(hào)】：D918.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 趙黎;刑事訴訟司法鑒定制度分析[J];渝州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2001年06期

2 朱玉璋;國(guó)外司法鑒定制度[J];中國(guó)司法;2004年06期

3 王云海;日本司法鑒定制度的現(xiàn)狀與改革[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年06期

4 張永泉;論民事鑒定制度[J];法學(xué)研究;2000年05期

5 郭潔;我國(guó)司法鑒定制度改革若干問題的思考[J];遼寧大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年03期

6 張風(fēng)杰;對(duì)司法鑒定概念內(nèi)涵的再認(rèn)識(shí)[J];山西高等學(xué)校社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2004年12期

7 張銳;司法鑒定的基本問題研究[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2004年05期

本文編號(hào)：2060588