论我国鉴定制度的模式选择——来自英、美中立专家的启示

鉴定制度改革的核心问题,就是如何保障鉴定结论的客观性与鉴定程序的正当性。在这两个方面,我们可以从英美国家的中立专家证人制度中得到很好的启发。与英美对抗制专家证人相比,中立专家可以很好地保障专家证言的客观性和程序的效率;与大陆法国家的鉴定人制度相比,中立专家可以确保当事人的诉讼权利和程序的公正性。因此,为了适应诉讼制度的发展要求,我国的鉴定制度改革可以采取这样的路径:在民事诉讼中主要采取对抗制专家证人为主,中立专家为辅的制度;而在刑事诉讼中则采取中立专家证人制度。

Choosing a Mode for Our Expert Conclusion System——Enlightened by Neutral Experts in Common Law Countries

The core issue in the reform of expert conclusion system is how to guarantee the due process and the objectivity of expert conclusions. The neutral experts in Common Law countries can be a perfect example for us. Neutral experts can not only overcome the partiality and inefficiency of party-retained experts in Common Law countries, but also promote the due process in the use of experts in Continental countries, and guarantee the litigious rights of all parties. Hence, in order to meet the demands of modern litigious development, we should take such a mode for the reform of our expert conclusion system: in civil litigation, we should mainly use party-retained experts; while in criminal litigation, we shall adopt neutral experts.