發(fā)布時間：2019-05-15 12:06

【摘要】：司法鑒定制度作為證據(jù)制度的重要組成部分，與訴訟制度、司法制度具有不可分割的天然聯(lián)系。司法鑒定制度是健全、完善司法制度，保障司法公正的重要基礎(chǔ)。當(dāng)前，以實(shí)現(xiàn)司法公正與效率為目標(biāo)的司法改革正在不斷推進(jìn)，而實(shí)踐中司法鑒定制度方面存在的問題卻日益暴露。鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)設(shè)立混亂，管理不順；鑒定法律、法規(guī)不健全，已有的部門規(guī)定互相沖突；多頭鑒定、重復(fù)鑒定泛濫，極大降低了訴訟效率，浪費(fèi)了訴訟資源，與司法改革的大目標(biāo)不相符。因而改革現(xiàn)有司法鑒定制度已成為有識之士的共同呼聲。在這場改革中，尤以司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)管理體制的改革為重，這是改革的基礎(chǔ)性工作。有鑒于此，筆者對我國司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)管理體制改革進(jìn)行了深入研究，提出了自己的看法。 本文除引言與結(jié)束語外共分為四個部分，全文四萬余字。 第—部分為概述，主要闡釋了司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)的概念、我國司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)管理體制發(fā)展的歷史概況和現(xiàn)狀、對我國司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)管理體制進(jìn)行改革的必要性及學(xué)者們對我國司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)管理體制改革的建議和論證。這是本文的基礎(chǔ)部分，主要是為下面的論述進(jìn)行鋪墊。 第二部分主要是對國外司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)的管理體制進(jìn)行考察。他山之石可以攻玉，，國外的成功經(jīng)驗(yàn)值得我們借鑒。本文在考察了目前世界上的三種司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)管理模式，即：集中型、分散型和多元制三種模式后，對國外司法鑒定初構(gòu)管理體制給我們的啟示進(jìn)行了系統(tǒng)總結(jié)。 第三部分從總體上提出了筆者對我國司法鑒定初構(gòu)管理體制改革的建議方案。在分析了改革的指導(dǎo)思想與原則的基礎(chǔ)上，提出我們應(yīng)建立“雙軌制多元化”的司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)管理體制。 第四部分是本文的重點(diǎn)。具體論述了如何按“雙軌制多元化”構(gòu)想改革我國的司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)。我們應(yīng)采取漸進(jìn)的方式逐步對部門鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)和社會鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)做出改革。對部門鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)的改革，應(yīng)分兩步走，第一步將公、檢、法機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)的鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)從其它業(yè)務(wù)部門中分離出來，成為單獨(dú)設(shè)置的業(yè)務(wù)部門，以便增強(qiáng)其獨(dú)立性，增強(qiáng)鑒定結(jié)論的公正性。同時應(yīng)允許公、檢機(jī)關(guān)的鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)面向社會從事有償服務(wù)。第二步，待條件成熟時，取消法院鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)的鑒定職能，使其承擔(dān)委托鑒定、進(jìn)行文證審查和組織高級專家進(jìn)行會鑒的職能。對于社會鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)則應(yīng)進(jìn)一步進(jìn)行加強(qiáng)和提高，同時 做好監(jiān)督、管理工作。而對于司法鑒定專家委員會在目前泊少有存在的必 ，待條件成熟時，‘司法鑒定專家委員會應(yīng)恥肖，而由法院所組織的高級 家會鑒來代替。
[Abstract]:As an important part of evidence system, judicial expertise system is inextricably related to litigation system and judicial system. Judicial expertise system is an important basis for perfecting, perfecting judicial system and ensuring judicial justice. At present, the judicial reform aimed at realizing judicial justice and efficiency is constantly advancing, but the problems existing in the judicial identification system in practice are increasingly exposed. The establishment of appraisal institutions is chaotic and the management is not smooth. The appraisal laws and regulations are not perfect, and the existing departmental regulations are in conflict with each other. The proliferation of multi-head identification and repeated identification greatly reduces the efficiency of litigation and wastes litigation resources, which is inconsistent with the great goal of judicial reform. Therefore, the reform of the existing judicial expertise system has become the common voice of people of insight. In this reform, especially the reform of the management system of judicial expertise institutions, which is the basic work of the reform. In view of this, the author has carried on the thorough research to our country judicial appraisal organization management system reform, has proposed own opinion. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four parts, the full text more than 40,000 words. The first part is an overview, which mainly explains the concept of judicial expertise institution, the historical overview and present situation of the development of the management system of judicial expertise institution in our country. The necessity of reforming the management system of judicial expertise institutions in China and the suggestions and argumentation of scholars on the reform of the management system of judicial expertise institutions in China. This is the basic part of this article, mainly for the following discussion to pave the way. The second part is mainly to investigate the management system of foreign judicial expertise institutions. The stone of other mountains can be used to attack jade, and the successful experience of foreign countries is worthy of our reference. After investigating three kinds of management modes of judicial expertise institutions in the world, namely, centralized, decentralized and pluralistic systems, this paper makes a systematic summary of the enlightenment given to us by the initial structure of judicial expertise management system in foreign countries. The third part puts forward the author's suggestions on the reform of the initial structure management system of judicial expertise in China. On the basis of analyzing the guiding ideology and principles of the reform, this paper puts forward that we should establish the management system of judicial expertise institutions with "two-track diversification". The fourth part is the focus of this paper. This paper discusses in detail how to reform the judicial expertise institution of our country according to the conception of "two-track diversification". We should take a gradual approach to the gradual reform of departmental and social appraisal institutions. The reform of departmental appraisal institutions should be carried out in two steps. In the first step, the appraisal institutions within the public, inspection and legal organs should be separated from other business departments and become separate operational departments in order to enhance their independence. Enhance the fairness of the appraisal conclusion. At the same time, the appraisal institutions of the public and procuratorial organs should be allowed to engage in paid services to the society. The second step, when the conditions are ripe, cancel the appraisal function of the court appraisal organization, make it undertake the function of entrusting the appraisal, carrying on the document examination and organizing the senior expert to carry on the meeting. Social appraisal institutions should be further strengthened and improved, at the same time do a good job of supervision and management. However, when the conditions are ripe, the Committee of experts on Forensic expertise should be ashamed of the need for the existence of the Committee of experts on Forensic expertise at present. Instead, the senior families organized by the court will take the place of it.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2004
【分類號】：D918.9

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 施敏;司法鑒定機(jī)構(gòu)的準(zhǔn)入制度[D];華東政法大學(xué);2007年

本文編號：2477491