發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-16 04:35

  本文選題：專家輔助人 + 專家證人　； 參考：《醫(yī)學(xué)與哲學(xué)(A)》2017年09期

【摘要】：醫(yī)學(xué)專家在刑事訴訟中出庭制度設(shè)計(jì)的立法預(yù)期在于實(shí)現(xiàn)對(duì)鑒定意見的有效質(zhì)證,幫助法官準(zhǔn)確理解專門性問題。但法律及司法解釋對(duì)出庭專家的角色定位、意見屬性等問題規(guī)定模糊,不僅導(dǎo)致理解出現(xiàn)分歧,也使專家在出庭問題上面臨困惑,制度實(shí)際運(yùn)行中出庭率低,難以實(shí)現(xiàn)制度預(yù)設(shè)價(jià)值。以最為常見的醫(yī)學(xué)專家這一群體為研究面向,從法律和倫理角度進(jìn)行深層次思辨,提出專家意見定位的中立性是消解困惑、解除癥結(jié)的根本,通過對(duì)醫(yī)學(xué)專家領(lǐng)域小視角的具體問題剖析折射刑事訴訟大制度的應(yīng)然規(guī)則設(shè)計(jì)。
[Abstract]:The legislative expectation of the design of medical experts' appearance system in criminal procedure is to realize the effective cross-examination of the appraisal opinion and to help the judge to understand the specialized problem accurately. However, the legal and judicial interpretations not only lead to differences in understanding, but also make experts face confusion in court appearance and low court attendance rate in the actual operation of the system, because of the ambiguity of legal and judicial interpretations on the role of court experts, the nature of opinions, and so on. It is difficult to realize the preset value of system. Taking the most common medical experts as the research direction, and thinking deeply from the angle of law and ethics, the author points out that the neutralization of the expert opinion is the fundamental way to resolve the confusion and relieve the crux of the problem. By analyzing the specific problems of medical experts from a small angle of view, this paper analyzes the design of the ought-be rules for refracting the large system of criminal procedure.
【作者單位】： 遼寧大學(xué)法學(xué)院;大連醫(yī)科大學(xué)人文與社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)院;大連醫(yī)科大學(xué)職業(yè)發(fā)展教研室;
【基金】：2017年四川省哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)重點(diǎn)研究基地四川醫(yī)事衛(wèi)生法治研究中心課題(YF17-Y18) 2013年教育部人文社會(huì)科學(xué)研究青年基金項(xiàng)目(13YJC820087) 2014年遼寧省社會(huì)科學(xué)規(guī)劃基金重點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目(L14FX003) 2016年教育部人文社會(huì)科學(xué)研究青年基金項(xiàng)目(16YJCZH087)
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2
，

本文編號(hào)：1895493