刑事鉴定意见在民事诉讼中的使用问题

Research on the use of criminal expert opinions in civil procedure

在当前的司法实践中,刑事鉴定意见在民事诉讼中的使用存在较大分歧。刑事鉴定体制和民事鉴定体制的差异以及民事鉴定意见“法院委托”属性的强调是刑事鉴定意见在民事诉讼中使用的主要障碍。从证据法理和充分利用证据资源查清案件事实的角度考量,在民事诉讼中刑事鉴定意见仍应该归属于鉴定意见。法官对刑事鉴定意见证明力的认定更具复杂性,原则上需要通过质证程序对刑事鉴定意见的内容进行实质审查,破除“刑事”和“鉴定意见”双重因素的影响,同时保障当事人的质证权,弥补刑事鉴定意见缺失的程序要素。当同时存在刑事鉴定意见和民事鉴定意见时,为了避免法官面对不同鉴定意见的困境,可将刑事鉴定意见的作用限定为强化或者弹劾民事鉴定意见的效力。

In the current judicial practice, there are great differences in the use of criminal expert opinions in civil procedure. The main obstacles of the use of criminal expert opinions in civil procedure mainly include the differences between criminal appraisal system and civil appraisal system and the emphasis on the attribute of “court entrustment” of civil expert opinions. From the perspective of following the evidence jurisprudence and making full use of evidence resources to clarify the facts of the case, criminal expert opinions should still be classified into expert opinions in civil procedure. The determination of the weight of criminal expert opinions is more complex. In order to eliminate the influence of the factors of “criminal” and “expert opinions”, to protect the parties’ right to cross-examination and to make up for the lack of procedural elements, it is necessary to conduct a substantive review of content of the criminal expert opinions through the cross-examination procedure. When there are criminal expert opinions and civil expert opinions at the same time, the role of criminal expert opinions can be limited to the scope of strengthening or impeaching the effectiveness of civil expert opinions, so as to avoid the dilemma of judges facing different expert opinions.