“定病”与“定罪”:精神病鉴定专家对刑事法官裁判权的双重挑战  

Determination of Mental Disease and the Crimethe Dual Challenges of the Psychiatric Evaluation of Experts to Judge Jurisdiction

作　　者：宋远升[1] SONG Yuansheng(East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai 200042, Chin)

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学刑事司法学院,上海200042

出　　处：《法学论坛》2017年第1期120-127,共8页Legal Forum

摘　　要：在触法精神病人的刑事案件中,精神病鉴定专家的作用非常关键,其决定了犯罪的有无、轻重甚至是生死的界限。之所以精神病鉴定专家在精神病刑事司法程序中具有不可或缺的地位,究其原因,这与精神病学的专业性直接勾连。然而,精神病鉴定专家这种专业知识造就的地位,不仅为普通人的理解设置了障碍,而且也对法官的裁判造成了一定的纠结,从而导致二者之间在"定病"(精神病鉴定意见的证据效力)及"定罪"(刑事责任能力)方面权力的冲突。调适的关键是应遵守司法最终裁判的帝王原则,同时也应尊重精神病鉴定意见的专业性及科学性,确立以法官为主导的且与精神病鉴定专家分工合作的司法裁判机制。If the mental patients commit crime, psychiatric expert plays a key role, which determines the severity and level of crime. The reason why the psychiatric expert has an indispensable status in the judicial procedure of criminal mental disease lies in the specialty of psychiatry. However, duo to the status of Psychiatric expert on professional knowledge, it not only sets up obstacles for the understanding of ordinary people, but also caused some contradictions between the judge and psychiatric expert. Therefore, we should abide by the principle of judicial final ruling and respect psychiatric expert opinions to establish the division judicial judgment mechanism dominated by the judge and cooperated by the psychiatric expert.

关 键 词：精神病鉴定专家 知识性权力 法官 司法裁判权 

分 类 号：D915.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]