论司法鉴定的科学性  

Study on Scientific Properties of Forensic Appraisal

作　　者：刘鑫[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]贵州黎平人同创新中心 [2]中国政法大学证据科学研究院

出　　处：《中国政法大学学报》2014年第5期110-121,159,共12页Journal Of CUPL

基　　金：“十二五”司法部科技部国家科技支撑项目“司法鉴定关键技术”(编号2012BAK16B02-2)

摘　　要：无论是英美法系还是大陆法系,乃至我国的司法鉴定制度,科学性都是鉴定结论的本质属性,但是科学的本意是分科之学,是系统知识的集合,但在证据学领域基本上把科学等同于正确。鉴定结论的科学性实际上就是要注重科学精神,把鉴定结论的科学性绝对化、极端化、万能化的行为,有违科学的本质,背叛了科学的精神。鉴定结论具有科学性的论断是有问题的,其中还包含着技术和经验。法庭在遴选鉴定人的时候,不仅要对鉴定人的资格做形式审查,更要对鉴定人的鉴定能力做实质审查。对鉴定结论的科学性的审查还应当排除伪科学的东西。唯有如此,才可能将鉴定结论回归到证据的层面,通过法庭质证,符合证据采信标准的鉴定结论才能作为定案依据。Either common law or civil law, and even our judicial appraisal system, scientific conclusions are essential attribute. Although the purported scientific branch of learning is a collection of system knowledge, in the field of evidence we basically put Science be equivalent to the right. Appraisal conclusion actually is to focus on the spirit of science, identified scientific attribution as absolute, extreme, universal-oriented behavior, which contraries to the nature of science, betrays the spirit of science. The assertion that appraisal conclusions are scientific is questionable, because it also contains technology and experience. In selection of appraiser, the court should not only do formal examination of the appraiser's qualification, but also do substantive examination of the appraiser's ability. The review should also be excluded from pseudo-scientific stuff. Only in this way, the appraisal conclusions will likely return to the level of evidence, and only meeting the admissible standard of evidence, the appraisal conclusions can be taken as a basis through the court cross-examination.

关 键 词：司法鉴定 鉴定结论 科学性 鉴定资格 鉴定能力 

分 类 号：D918.9[政治法律—法学]