發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-16 23:28

  本文選題：專家輔助人 + 專家證人　； 參考：《遼寧大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：20世紀(jì)是人類社會(huì)進(jìn)入到信息化的時(shí)代，現(xiàn)代科學(xué)技術(shù)得到長(zhǎng)足發(fā)展，刑事領(lǐng)域科學(xué)技術(shù)也取得突破性進(jìn)展。當(dāng)刑事訴訟案件中出現(xiàn)越來(lái)越多專業(yè)化、技術(shù)化的問(wèn)題時(shí)，專家在刑事司法工作中的作用也日益突顯。為了解決這些問(wèn)題，大陸法系國(guó)家創(chuàng)建了司法鑒定制度以解決案件中的專門(mén)性問(wèn)題，英美法系國(guó)家建立了專家證人制度以期來(lái)發(fā)現(xiàn)案件真相。無(wú)論是鑒定人制度還是專家證人制度都存在著缺陷弊端，難以滿足當(dāng)今社會(huì)司法實(shí)踐的需要，意大利則在融合兩大法系制度的基礎(chǔ)上建立了技術(shù)顧問(wèn)制度，是借鑒兩大法系鑒定制度優(yōu)點(diǎn)的典型國(guó)家。 在我國(guó)訴訟實(shí)踐中，由于高科技犯罪案件日益增多，在庭審中法官對(duì)專門(mén)性問(wèn)題的認(rèn)定已經(jīng)成為審理案件的關(guān)鍵。我國(guó)三大訴訟法中均規(guī)定鑒定意見(jiàn)是法定證據(jù)種類之一，也突顯了司法鑒定在訴訟過(guò)程中的作用。作為法定證據(jù)的鑒定意見(jiàn)必須經(jīng)過(guò)質(zhì)證才能成為定案的根據(jù)，但是，隨著我國(guó)對(duì)抗式刑事庭審模式改革的逐步深入，對(duì)法庭的質(zhì)證、認(rèn)證提出了更高要求，而我國(guó)超職權(quán)主義的鑒定機(jī)制導(dǎo)致鑒定意見(jiàn)在庭審中得不到有效的質(zhì)證，主要是因?yàn)殍b定人出庭率極低，達(dá)不到預(yù)期的質(zhì)證效果，最終影響法官對(duì)案件事實(shí)的認(rèn)定。我國(guó)新刑事訴訟法中建立了專家輔助人制度，主要是輔助控辯雙方當(dāng)事人加深對(duì)專門(mén)性問(wèn)題的理解，審查鑒定意見(jiàn)并提出專家意見(jiàn)。由當(dāng)事人聘請(qǐng)專家輔助人對(duì)鑒定意見(jiàn)提出合理的異議，恰是解決鑒定意見(jiàn)無(wú)法有效質(zhì)證難題的措施。刑事訴訟專家輔助人制度在我國(guó)還是一個(gè)嶄新的研究領(lǐng)域，本文擬以我國(guó)刑事訴訟專家輔助人制度立法規(guī)定中存在的問(wèn)題及具體制度完善為切入點(diǎn)和核心，為進(jìn)一步完善該制度提出若干建議。 第一部分，探討了“專家輔助人”的概念、特點(diǎn)、訴訟地位等基本理論問(wèn)題，并在此基礎(chǔ)上剖析了刑事訴訟中專家輔助人制度所具有的的功能。 第二部分，從域外相關(guān)專家輔助人制度不同的立法規(guī)定展開(kāi)，剖析了英美法系專家證人選任資格、選任程序、享有的權(quán)利、履行的義務(wù)，以及專家證據(jù)的庭前開(kāi)示等問(wèn)題，以及意大利的技術(shù)顧問(wèn)制度和俄羅斯的專家制度。并在借鑒西方發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家在刑事訴訟中實(shí)施專家證人制度有效經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上，最終為我國(guó)刑事訴訟專家輔助人制度的完善提供可行的建議。 第三部分，分析了我國(guó)目前刑事訴訟專家輔助人制度的立法現(xiàn)狀，以及在立法規(guī)定中存在的幾個(gè)問(wèn)題，為今后我國(guó)專家輔助人制度在司法實(shí)踐操作中的進(jìn)一步完善指明了方向。 第四部分，通過(guò)吸取域外發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家法律規(guī)定的優(yōu)點(diǎn)和借鑒其實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)，以及在對(duì)我國(guó)現(xiàn)行立法關(guān)于刑事訴訟專家輔助人制度規(guī)定存在的缺陷進(jìn)行分析梳理的基礎(chǔ)上，，對(duì)此制度的完善提出了個(gè)人的新見(jiàn)解，主要探討了專家輔助人的資質(zhì)認(rèn)定、權(quán)利義務(wù)、專家意見(jiàn)的效力、對(duì)專家輔助人參加刑事訴訟程序的探索、建立專家輔助人法律援助制度等實(shí)踐難題。以此彌補(bǔ)法律規(guī)定的模糊性，增強(qiáng)司法實(shí)踐的操作性。
[Abstract]:In order to solve these problems , the role of experts in criminal justice is becoming more and more prominent . In order to solve these problems , the role of experts in criminal justice is becoming more and more prominent . In order to solve these problems , the law system of civil law has established expert witness system to solve the special problems in the case .

In our country ' s litigation practice , because of the increasing number of high - tech crime cases , the judge ' s cognizance of the special problem in court has become the key to the case .

In the first part , the basic theories of the concept , characteristics and litigation status of " expert assistant " are discussed , and the function of expert assistant system in criminal procedure is analyzed .

The second part , from the different legislative provisions of the assistant system of the relevant expert system , analyzes the questions such as selecting the qualification of the expert witness , selecting the procedure , the right to enjoy , the obligation of the performance , and the expert system of the expert evidence , as well as the technical advisor system of Italy and the expert system of Russia , and finally , using the effective experience of the expert witness system in the criminal procedure of the developed countries , finally , it provides feasible suggestions for the perfection of the auxiliary system of the criminal procedure expert in China .

In the third part , the author analyses the legislation status quo of the assistant system of criminal procedure experts in our country , and some problems existing in the legislative provisions , and points out the direction for further perfection of the system of expert assist in judicial practice in the future .

The fourth part , on the basis of analyzing the advantages of the laws of the developed countries and drawing on its practical experience , and analyzing the defects of the existing legislation of our country about the existence of the auxiliary person system of the criminal procedure expert , puts forward the new opinions of the individual , mainly probes into practical problems such as the qualification determination , the rights and obligations , the effectiveness of the expert opinion , the exploration of the participation of the auxiliary person in the criminal procedure , the establishment of the legal aid system of the expert assistant , and so on , thus making up the ambiguity of the legal provisions and enhancing the operability of judicial practice .
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳志興;黃友鋒;;簡(jiǎn)析意大利國(guó)家的“技術(shù)顧問(wèn)”制度[J];長(zhǎng)春理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年01期

2 馬婷婷;;專家證人相關(guān)問(wèn)題探析——以刑事訴訟為背景[J];重慶理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué));2010年08期

3 季美君;;英國(guó)專家證據(jù)可采性問(wèn)題研究[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2007年06期

4 陳斌;王路;;論我國(guó)刑事訴訟中的專家輔助人及其制度構(gòu)建[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2011年01期

5 鄭昱;;論英美法系專家證人制度對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒[J];海峽法學(xué);2011年02期

6 甘力文;張偉彥;;論我國(guó)刑事訴訟專家證人制度[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年09期

7 范加慶;朱麗云;;淺談我國(guó)專家輔助人制度[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年17期

8 季美君;姚石京;;國(guó)外專家證人制度探析及借鑒[J];中國(guó)司法;2012年08期

9 左寧;;我國(guó)刑事專家輔助人制度基本問(wèn)題論略[J];法學(xué)雜志;2012年12期

10 邱飛;;論刑事訴訟專家輔助人[J];華章;2009年05期

本文編號(hào)：1898899