非鉴定专家制度在我国刑事诉讼中的完善  

On the Improvement of Non-Judicial Expert System in Chinese Criminal Prosecution

作　　者：龙宗智[1] 孙末非[1] 

机构地区：[1]四川大学法学院

出　　处：《吉林大学社会科学学报》2014年第1期102-111,174-175,共10页Jilin University Journal Social Sciences Edition

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目(11AFX015)

摘　　要：新刑事诉讼法及司法解释首次在原有鉴定制度之外,补充了新的非鉴定专家制度。这是一个重要的突破,但规则还有待完善。目前立法对专家的法律性质规定并不明确,在日后的实践中,专家对鉴定事项应主要履行辅助人的职责;专家在接受询问时应允许其阐述完整、独立的意见并作为证明参考;对非鉴定事项,允许专家发挥类似于专家证人的功能并将其提供的检验报告作为证据使用。在专家资格的审查方面,不设立回避制度,法院应在个案中确认专家证人的适格性并在专业性、重要性、争议性三方面审查专家出庭的必要性。同时,专家出庭适用鉴定人的规定亦存在一些问题,应进一步完善专家不同于鉴定人的质询规则、费用支付规则和法律责任。New criminal procedure law firstly established new expert institution besides judicial expertise institution, which is the significant progress of expert system. But there are some contradictions and omissions in the provisions which should be corrected in judicial practice. The experts appear in court shall be termed as expert assessor in face of judicial appraisal items. But experts are permitted to support independent and complete opinion as a reference. The experts can act as expert witness when work on professional issues which are not judicial appraisal items. survey report supported from experts can be regarded as evidence in trial. Avoidance system shouldn't apply to the Non-judicial experts. The expert eligibility shall be confirmed by court in concrete cases. The aspects of necessity of testifying at the trial include professional, significance and controversy. There are some problems with the code which provided'the relevant provisions concerning the judicial expert shall apply to the Non-judicial experts'. Avoidance system shouldn't apply to the Non-judicial experts. The inquiry rules at the trail,payment and legal liability should be different between expert witness and judicial expert.

关 键 词：非鉴定专家制度 专家证人 专家证据 专家出庭 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]