本文選題：強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療　切入點(diǎn)：精神鑒定　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：精神障礙者作為無(wú)力有效主張自身權(quán)益但同時(shí)又嚴(yán)重威脅社會(huì)公眾生命和財(cái)產(chǎn)安全的特殊群體，其處遇問(wèn)題已經(jīng)成為關(guān)乎公民權(quán)利、自由和社會(huì)穩(wěn)定與秩序的重大社會(huì)問(wèn)題。隨著我國(guó)精神障礙患者人數(shù)的增多、精神衛(wèi)生事業(yè)的發(fā)展，強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療制度的問(wèn)題凸顯，我國(guó)《刑事訴訟法》修正案新增了一章專門規(guī)定刑事訴訟中的強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療制度，并出臺(tái)了相應(yīng)的司法解釋。對(duì)觸犯刑事法律規(guī)定但卻因欠缺刑事責(zé)任能力的精神障礙者進(jìn)行規(guī)制的強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療制度正在逐步的發(fā)展與完善。我國(guó)強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療制度的規(guī)定逐步清晰、逐步具體，也更加注重精神障礙者的人權(quán)保障。但是，這并不表明我國(guó)的強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療制度已經(jīng)足夠完善，其實(shí)際上仍然存在不少問(wèn)題。最為突出的便是強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療制度中的精神鑒定問(wèn)題一直處在混亂狀態(tài)中，而精神鑒定在強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療程序中的意義和作用卻是十分重大的。在司法實(shí)踐中，無(wú)論是精神鑒定的性質(zhì)、鑒定的內(nèi)容、鑒定的主體，還是鑒定意見(jiàn)的司法采信問(wèn)題均呈現(xiàn)出一種疑難與混亂的狀態(tài)。刑事強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療程序中的鑒定，關(guān)系到是否做出強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療的決定，而強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療措施的決定關(guān)系到精神障礙者的人身自由與人權(quán)保障。因此，對(duì)強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療程序中的鑒定問(wèn)題而言，要力求鑒定的科學(xué)準(zhǔn)確，鑒定程序的合理嚴(yán)格。鑒于此，筆者深感強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療程序中的鑒定問(wèn)題實(shí)乃急需研究和解決的重要課題。 本文通過(guò)對(duì)強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療制度的性質(zhì)與立法目的，以及精神鑒定的特征與其對(duì)于強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療程序的意義為基礎(chǔ)，對(duì)精神鑒定的兩個(gè)主要內(nèi)容刑事責(zé)任能力和人身危險(xiǎn)性的鑒定進(jìn)行論證，認(rèn)為刑事責(zé)任能力需要由精神鑒定專家作出，以精神狀況、辨認(rèn)能力和認(rèn)識(shí)能力為主要內(nèi)容，公檢法機(jī)關(guān)僅對(duì)鑒定中的法律問(wèn)題為精神鑒定專家提供必要的法律幫助。進(jìn)而對(duì)鑒定的具體程序規(guī)制展開分析，包括鑒定的啟動(dòng)權(quán)配置，交由公法檢機(jī)關(guān)啟動(dòng)，但賦予當(dāng)事人方申請(qǐng)鑒定的權(quán)利及申請(qǐng)權(quán)之救濟(jì)權(quán)，還包括鑒定人的資質(zhì)與數(shù)量，尤其是抨擊對(duì)具有較強(qiáng)主觀性的鑒定意見(jiàn)適合通過(guò)多名鑒定人、多頭鑒定的方式增加鑒定意見(jiàn)的準(zhǔn)確性的問(wèn)題。最后從鑒定意見(jiàn)的證據(jù)能力和證明力上論證了法庭對(duì)鑒定意見(jiàn)的采信規(guī)則，再次強(qiáng)調(diào)鑒定意見(jiàn)是一種獨(dú)立的證據(jù)屬性，，需要經(jīng)過(guò)法庭的質(zhì)證與認(rèn)證方可采信，并且，對(duì)于多份鑒定意見(jiàn)的不一致，也只有通過(guò)法庭對(duì)鑒定意見(jiàn)的推理依據(jù)和推理過(guò)程進(jìn)行推敲、質(zhì)證方可最終確認(rèn)鑒定意見(jiàn)的準(zhǔn)確與否、采信與否的問(wèn)題。此外，本文還將結(jié)合我國(guó)現(xiàn)有法律法規(guī)與司法實(shí)務(wù)操作，對(duì)精神障礙者刑事強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療中的鑒定問(wèn)題提出立法與司法上的完善與落實(shí)建議。
[Abstract]:As a special group which can not effectively claim their own rights and interests but at the same time seriously threaten the safety of public life and property, the problem of mental disorders has become a matter of civil rights. Major social problems of freedom and social stability and order. With the increase in the number of patients with mental disorders and the development of mental health care in China, the problem of compulsory medical care has become prominent. The amendment to the Criminal procedure Law of our country has added a new chapter specifically providing for the compulsory medical care system in criminal proceedings. The compulsory medical system, which violates the provisions of criminal law but lacks the ability of criminal responsibility, is gradually developing and perfecting, and the provisions of compulsory medical system in China are gradually clear. Step by step, and pay more attention to the protection of the human rights of people with mental disabilities. However, this does not show that the compulsory medical system in our country is sufficiently perfect. In fact, there are still a lot of problems. The most prominent problem is that the problem of psychiatric appraisal in the compulsory medical system has been in a state of confusion. However, the significance and function of spiritual appraisal in compulsory medical procedure is very important. In judicial practice, whether it is the nature, content, subject of appraisal, Whether the judicial acceptance of an appraisal opinion presents a state of difficulty and confusion. The identification in the criminal compulsory medical procedure is related to whether to make a decision on compulsory medical treatment. And the decision of compulsory medical measures is related to the personal liberty and human rights of the mentally handicapped. Therefore, in the case of identification in compulsory medical procedures, it is necessary to strive for the scientific accuracy of identification and the reasonableness and rigour of the identification procedure. In view of this, The author deeply feels that the problem of identification in compulsory medical procedure is an important subject in urgent need of study and solution. Based on the analysis of the nature and legislative purpose of compulsory medical care system, as well as the characteristics of spiritual appraisal and its significance for compulsory medical procedures, This paper demonstrates the two main contents of mental appraisal, criminal responsibility ability and personal dangerousness, and holds that the criminal responsibility ability should be made by the expert of spiritual appraisal, with mental condition, recognition ability and cognitive ability as the main content. The Public Security Bureau, the Procuratorate, and the court organ only provide necessary legal assistance to the experts in the identification of the law, and then analyze the specific procedural regulations of the appraisal, including the allocation of the start-up power of the appraisal, and hand it over to the public procuratorial organ to start the work. However, giving the parties the right to apply for appraisal and the right to remedy the right to apply also includes the qualification and number of experts, especially the criticism that the expert opinion with strong subjectivity is suitable for passing through more than one expert. The way of multiple appraisal increases the question of accuracy of appraisal opinion. Finally, from the point of view of the evidence ability and proof power of the appraisal opinion, the paper demonstrates the rules of acceptance of the appraisal opinion by the court, and emphasizes once again that the appraisal opinion is an independent evidence attribute. It requires cross-examination and certification of the court to be accepted, and the inconsistency of multiple opinions can only be examined by the court through the reasoning basis and reasoning process of the opinion. In addition, this paper will combine the existing laws and regulations of our country with the practice of judicial practice. This paper puts forward some suggestions on the perfection and implementation of legislation and judicature on the problem of identification in criminal compulsory medical treatment for mental disorders.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(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8條

1 仙波厚;木夏本巧;郭華;郎治國(guó);;精神鑒定的證明力[J];研究生法學(xué);2005年02期

2 郭華;;刑事鑒定制度修改的背景、爭(zhēng)議及解讀[J];證據(jù)科學(xué);2012年02期

3 汪建成;;司法鑒定基礎(chǔ)理論研究[J];法學(xué)家;2009年04期

4 李學(xué)軍,陳霞;鑒定結(jié)論的證據(jù)地位及其質(zhì)證、認(rèn)證[J];公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2002年04期

5 郭華;;證明責(zé)任與強(qiáng)制鑒定:“精神病”的鑒定問(wèn)題研究[J];中國(guó)司法鑒定;2007年03期

6 周國(guó)君;李娜玲;;試論我國(guó)刑事強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療措施的司法化[J];山東警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年06期

7 張守良;鞠佳佳;;刑事訴訟中強(qiáng)制醫(yī)療程序的法律監(jiān)督[J];人民檢察;2012年14期

8 劉俊榮;肖玲;;精神障礙患者非自愿住院醫(yī)療的倫理審視——兼評(píng)中國(guó)《精神衛(wèi)生法(草案)》中的非自愿住院醫(yī)療制度[J];武漢科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年06期

本文編號(hào)：1655420