对我国刑事鉴定结论的反思  

Reconsideration on Expert Conclusion in the Chinese Criminal Justice System.

作　　者：莫然[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]中山大学法学院 [2]广东金融学院法律系

出　　处：《证据科学》2011年第1期31-37,共7页Evidence Science

摘　　要：近年来备受社会关注的黄静案、代义案以及连丽丽案从不同角度揭示了刑事鉴定结论中所存在的三大弊端:公安机关"自侦自鉴",对是否鉴定以及鉴定人的选择享有决定权;在立案侦查阶段的鉴定结论未经法院认证便当然地被作为证据使用;鉴定结论的采信标准不一,同时这三个案件也让我们看到了若要消除这些弊端,必须将关注点集中在立案和侦查阶段。因此,建立鉴定人名册制度,在鉴定决定权和鉴定人选任权中纳入平等的对抗因素,通过设立听证程序使法院得以介入立案和侦查阶段对鉴定结论做出认证,以指导性标准指引和规范法院对鉴定结论的采信权,可以说是颇有针对性的改革措施。In recent years, the HuangLi Case, DaiYi Case and LianLiLi Case have drawn much attention since they show the three most important drawbacks of expert opinion in the Chinese system of criminal justice . First , the police enjoy the privilege of both investigating and deciding whether it is necessary to have an expert opinion and who can be the expert. Second, the police can use the expert opinion without approval from court during the whole investigation stage. Third, there are different standards for admission of an expert opinion. Based on these considerations, we realize the efforts to eliminate these drawbacks should be focused on both filing and investigation stages. We should carry out some reforms on, such as setting up a name list of registered experts, in- troducing an adversary equality in the decision-making of examining and the selection of experts, and establishing a hearing procedure to guide judge how to admit expert opinion.

关 键 词：鉴定结论 弊端 鉴定人名册 听证程序 鉴定标准 

分 类 号：D918.9[政治法律—法学]