【摘要】：專家輔助人制度并非是一個新興制度，無論是在英美法系國家還是大陸法系國家，專家輔助人制度都已經(jīng)發(fā)展的相當完備，并在司法實踐中得以廣泛運用。我國民事訴訟法與行政訴訟法也在十年前就規(guī)定了專家輔助人制度并且內(nèi)容也在不斷地完善，但從司法實踐的效果來看卻不盡人意，該制度并沒有得以廣泛應(yīng)用，其功能也沒有充分發(fā)揮。究其根本原因還是我國并沒有一套完整的專家輔助人制度，即立法上的不完善，導(dǎo)致了司法實踐的混亂狀態(tài)。 科學(xué)的進步、法治建設(shè)的需要、鑒定制度的硬傷、冤假錯案的頻出都催生我國刑事訴訟專家輔助人制度的出臺。2012年專家輔助人制度首次被寫進刑事訴訟法，其不僅以基本法的高度確立了專家輔助人制度，而且為我國鑒定制度改革埋下了伏筆。但我們也應(yīng)看到新刑事訴訟法只用了一個條文對此制度進行概括，，這不免引起學(xué)術(shù)界與司法實踐領(lǐng)域的熱議，畢竟有流于形式之嫌并且很難滿足司法實踐的需求。因此我們有必要借鑒域外相關(guān)制度的規(guī)定與立足本國法治建設(shè)國情，努力構(gòu)建一套符合我國刑事訴訟實踐需要的專家輔助人制度，從而使該制度與鑒定制度良性運轉(zhuǎn)，實現(xiàn)法治進步。本文共分為四大部分： 第一部分是專家輔助人制度概述。首先介紹了專家輔助人制度的概念，通過對相關(guān)概念的辨析，對專家輔助人進行準確定義。之后，重點探討了專家輔助人的地位，通過與相關(guān)訴訟參與人進行比較分析后對專家輔助人進行角色定位。專家輔助人地位的確立影響著其整個制度內(nèi)容的構(gòu)建，意義重大。 第二部分是專家輔助人制度在我國運行的現(xiàn)狀及其存在的問題。該部分首先簡要介紹了一下專家輔助人制度的背景，其中包括該制度產(chǎn)生的原因及其價值。然后介紹該制度在立法與司法上的現(xiàn)狀和總結(jié)了該制度的不足之處以及其在我國訴訟領(lǐng)域并未得到推廣的原因，為下兩部分的研究做基礎(chǔ)。 第三部分是域外相關(guān)制度的考察與評析。該部分重點介紹了意大利的技術(shù)顧問制度與俄羅斯的專家輔助人制度，兩個國家該制度發(fā)展已經(jīng)相當完備并且司法實踐效果突出。同時還對英國、日本、法國的專家輔助人立法上的特色之處進行了介紹。通過對這兩大法系國家有關(guān)該制度異同的歸納，為構(gòu)建我國專家輔助人制度提供思路。 第四部分是完善我國刑事訴訟專家輔助人制度的構(gòu)想。在前文對專家輔助人基本理論與域外相關(guān)國家規(guī)定的基礎(chǔ)上，分別從專家輔助人的適格制度、權(quán)利義務(wù)、責任、參與訴訟程序等方面對專家輔助人制度進行了全面構(gòu)建。同時還提出對相關(guān)配套制度的建設(shè)問題，以期能夠使我國專家輔助人制度更加完善。
[Abstract]:The expert assistant system is not a new system, whether in common law countries or civil law countries, the expert assistant system has been quite complete, and has been widely used in judicial practice. Ten years ago, the system of expert assistance was stipulated in the civil procedure law and administrative procedure law of our country, and the content was constantly improved, but the effect of judicial practice was not satisfactory, the system was not widely used, and its function was not brought into full play. The fundamental reason is that our country does not have a complete set of expert assistance system, that is, the legislative imperfections, which leads to the confusion of judicial practice. The scientific progress, the need of the construction of the rule of law, the hard injury of the appraisal system and the frequent occurrence of false and false cases all give birth to the introduction of the expert assistant system in criminal proceedings in our country. In 2012, the expert assistant system was first written into the criminal procedure law, which not only established the expert assistant system with the height of the basic law, but also laid the groundwork for the reform of the appraisal system in our country. However, we should also see that the new criminal procedure law uses only one provision to summarize this system, which can not help but cause heated discussion in the field of academic and judicial practice, after all, there is suspicion of being mere form and it is difficult to meet the needs of judicial practice. Therefore, it is necessary for us to draw lessons from the provisions of the relevant foreign systems and base on the national conditions of the construction of the rule of law in our country, and strive to construct a set of expert assistance system in accordance with the needs of the practice of criminal proceedings in our country, so as to make the system and appraisal system work healthily and realize the progress of the rule of law. This paper is divided into four parts: the first part is an overview of the expert assistance system. Firstly, the concept of expert assistant system is introduced, and the expert assistant is accurately defined by analyzing and analyzing the related concepts. After that, the status of expert assistant is discussed, and the role of expert assistant is defined by comparing with the relevant litigation participants. The establishment of expert assistant status affects the construction of its whole system content, which is of great significance. The second part is the current situation and existing problems of expert assistance system in our country. This part first briefly introduces the background of the expert assistant system, including the causes and value of the system. Then it introduces the present situation of the system in legislation and judicature and summarizes the shortcomings of the system and the reasons why it has not been popularized in the field of litigation in our country, which is the basis for the next two parts of the study. The third part is the investigation and evaluation of the foreign related system. This part focuses on the technical advisory system in Italy and the expert assistant system in Russia. The development of the system has been quite complete and the judicial practice effect is outstanding in the two countries. At the same time, it also introduces the characteristics of expert assistance legislation in Britain, Japan and France. Through the induction of the similarities and differences between the two legal countries, this paper provides ideas for the construction of expert assistant system in our country. The fourth part is the conception of perfecting the expert assistant system of criminal procedure in our country. On the basis of the basic theory of expert helper and the provisions of relevant countries abroad, this paper constructs the expert assistant system from the aspects of suitability system, rights and obligations, responsibility, participation in litigation procedure and so on. At the same time, it also puts forward the construction of the relevant supporting system, in order to make the expert assistant system more perfect in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 黃敏;我國應(yīng)當建立“專家輔助人”制度——意大利“技術(shù)顧問”制度之借鑒[J];中國司法鑒定;2003年04期

2 王俊民;沈亮;;訴訟輔助人意見與鑒定結(jié)論證據(jù)屬性比較研究[J];中國司法鑒定;2006年06期

本文編號：2507593