行刑衔接中采信专业性认定之困境及其破解——以事故调查报告为研究对象

The Dilemma of Admissibility of Professional Identification in the Connection Between Administrative and Criminal Procedures and the Way Out

根据2021年《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法>的解释》第101条的规定,事故调查报告中有关专门性事项的认定可以在刑事诉讼中使用。事故调查报告是一种较具代表性的专业性认定,以其为研究对象可以透视行政执法证据在刑事诉讼中使用时面临的如下共性问题:法定证据种类归属不明;采信专业性认定在法律和司法解释上存在障碍;责任追究形式不符合追究刑事责任的要求;无法发挥行政执法机关在事实认定和法律适用上的专长,等等。立法和司法解释应当把专门性证据规定为新的证据种类,明确行政执法证据在刑事诉讼中的使用范围,细化公安司法机关提前介入专业性认定的机制,完善行政执法机关与公安司法机关的双向咨询机制等。

Article 101 of the Interpretation by the Supreme People's Court Regarding the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China(2021)stipulates that special matters in accident investigation reports can be used in criminal proceedings.Accident investigation report is a kind of representative professional identification.Taking it as the research object,we can see the common problems faced by the use of professional identification in criminal proceedings,such as the unclear attribution of legal evidence types,the obstacles in legislation and judicial interpretations to the admissibility of professional identification,the failure of investigation of responsibility to meet the requirements of criminal responsibility,the inability of administrative law enforcement organs to give full play to their expertise in fact-finding and law application,etc.In legislation and judicial interpretation,special evidence should be added as a type of legal evidence,the scope of the use of administrative law enforcement evidence in criminal proceedings should be clarified,the mechanism for early intervention by public security and judicial organs should be refined,and the two-way consultation mechanism between administrative law enforcement organs and public security and judicial organs should be improved.