我国专家法律意见书法治化路径的建构——以美国“法庭之友”的借鉴为视角  

The Construction of the Legalization Path of China’Legal Experts Opinions:From the Perspective of the reference of American Amicus Curiae

作　　者：姚万勤[1] 何家慧 Yao Wanqin;He Jiahui

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《南海法学》2022年第5期88-100,共13页The South China Sea Law Journal

摘　　要：专家法律意见书在我国司法实践中大量出现,却没有一个科学的概念,始终处于尴尬的处境,这主要是缺乏立法规定、性质不明以及违反程序正当原则等原因导致的。分析专家法律意见书处境尴尬的根源,可通过比较国内相关法律制度,统计法庭引用专家法律意见书的频率等方式进行。此外,在美国蓬勃发展的“法庭之友”制度与我国专家法律意见书制度虽然在很多方面存在差异,但是两者在价值追求上具有紧密的内在联系,可相互借鉴。综合考虑上述因素,我国专家法律意见书的法制化途径分两步走,一是从实体上构建专家法律意见书的形式和内容,二是从程序上规范专家法律意见书的提交和采纳过程。Legal experts opinions appear a lot in China’s judicial practice.however,it has no scientific concept and is always in an awkward situation,which mainly caused by the lack of legislative provisions,unclear nature and violation of legitimate procedural principles etc.To analyze the source of the awkward situation,we can use these methods,like comparing the relevant domestic legal systems and calculating the frequency of legal experts opinions quoted by the courts etc.Meanwhile,the booming amicus curiae system in the United States and the legal experts opinions system in China are different in many aspects,but they have a close internal connection in the pursuit of value,so we can draw reference from each other.Considering the above factors comprehensively,the legalization path of China’s legal experts opinions is divided into two steps:The first is to construct the form and content of from the entity;the second is to standardize the submission and adoption process from the procedure.

关 键 词：专家法律意见书 司法困境 法庭之友 法制化途径 

分 类 号：D926.2[政治法律—法学] D925