专家证据运用的程序公正标准——欧洲人权法院的立场及与各国的比较

Procedural Justice Standard of Using of Expert Evidence——The position of the European Court of Human Rights and compared with countries

马迪钦娜案的判决反映出欧洲人权法院在专家证据运用问题上的完整立场,即从《欧洲人权公约》第6条第1款的"公正审判权"入手,以"平等武装"和"对抗式诉讼"两大基本原则为评判基准,系统提出涵盖专家证据生成、展示和庭上质证等环节的程序检验标准,并最终回到程序整体来综合审查专家证据的运用是否违反公正审判。该立场是在注重程序公正的国际背景下,公正审判在专家证据运用领域的具体展现,对我国鉴定意见运用的完善具有十分重要的启示意义。我国鉴定意见的运用要以此为借鉴,在坚持职权主义鉴定制度的同时,增强鉴定意见运用过程中的程序对抗性:允许辩方参与控方的鉴定过程并提出不同意见;明确控方负有完整开示鉴定意见的义务;赋予被告人要求鉴定人出庭并接受对质询问的权利;同时承认专家辅助人的部分意见具有相应的证据效力。

The judgment in the case of MATYTSINA v. RUSSIA reflects the complete position of the European Court of Human Rights（ ECHR） on the using of expert evidence,namely,from the right to ＂fair trial ＂ under Article 6 § 1 of the 《European Convention on Human Rights 》, by the principles of ＂equality of arms ＂ and＂adversarial proceedings＂,The ECHR puts forward the standard of procedure test,which includes the generation, discovery and court cross-examination of expert evidence,and finally returns to the whole procedure to examine whether the using of expert evidence violates the ＂fair trial＂. This position is a concrete demonstration of fair trial in the field of application of expert evidence in a context of international justice focusing on procedural justice,which is of great significance for the perfection of the application of our country＇s expert opinions. We should use this as reference and insist on the forensic system of the authoritarianism and strengthen the confrontation in the process of using the expert opinions： allow the defense to participate in the identification procedure of the prosecution and make different opinions; to clear the prosecution have the obligation to complete open expert opinions; to give the defendant the right to ask the expert to appear in court and answer questions; and to recognize that some of the opinions of the expert assistant have the corresponding evidence effect.