检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:董昊
机构地区:[1]上海政法学院法律学院,上海
出 处:《争议解决》2024年第3期163-169,共7页Dispute Settlement
摘 要:司法鉴定得出的结论作为司法过程中极为重要的一类证据,其采信和采纳的过程必要的前提就是司法鉴定人出庭作证,对于案件中的争议点接受诉讼双方的质询。迄今为止,虽然我国已经以明文法律的形式规定了司法鉴定人出庭,但是仍难以将这一制度有效实施。抛开司法鉴定的科学性以及权威性,我们需要着眼于司法鉴定自身的属性和特点探究其本质,从其满足诉讼和行业两方面角度分析,以达到促进司法过程公正的作用。As a very important kind of evidence in the judicial process, the conclusion drawn by judicial authentication is the necessary premise of its acceptance and adoption process, which is that the judicial expert testifies in court and accepts the inquiry of both parties for the disputed points in the case. However, although the system of judicial witnesses appearing in court has been stipulated in the relevant documents at present, it still cannot exclude the effective implementation of the cross-examination link of judicial witnesses appearing in court. Apart from the scientific nature and authority of forensic expertise, we need to focus on the aspect of forensic expertise as a lawsuit participation activity, from the aspects of laws and regulations, technical norms, professional ethics and other aspects of its analysis, to achieve the role of promoting justice in the judicial process.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15