民事专家证据司法采信的困境与路径选择

Judicial Acceptance of Expert Evidence:Predicament and the Way Out

专家证据介入民事诉讼活动已成为法院解决纠纷的新常态,但裁判者在运用专家证据发现真实、化解纠纷时往往面临多重难题。在认识论维度,法官对于专家证据的采信困境源于其作为求知者与裁判者的双重身份悖论、专家的分歧与偏见以及法律与科学的品性差异等方面。在价值论维度,当事人利用专家证据'制造真实'的空间亦大大提升了裁判者采信专家证据的难度。为提升专家证据司法采信的正当性与合法性,应以诉讼制度和证据制度的改革为载体,充分挖掘诉讼主体(包括专家)作为理性人的自治性和能动性,在正当法律程序中寻求主体间的共识,既使诉讼所建构的事实在正当程序中达致'似真',又最大限度地融贯司法的价值选择。

The use of expert evidence in civil proceedings has become a new normal for the settlement of disputes in the court.However,the judges often face multiple problems when using expert evidence to find out the truth and resolve the disputes.From the perspective of epistemology,the predicament for the judges to admit expert evidence stems from its paradox of dual-identities as a seeker and a judge,the differences and prejudices of the expert witnesses,and the distinctions between law and science.From the perspective of axiology,'creating truth'with expert evidence by the parties greatly enhances the difficulty of admitting expert evidence by the judges.In order to improve the validity and legitimacy of the acceptance of expert evidence,we should take the reform of procedural rules and evidence rules as the carrier,fully excavate the autonomy and initiative of the litigation subjects(including expert witnesses)as rational players,and seek consensus among subjects in due process,through which the facts constructed by litigation can achieve'quasitruth'in due process and the value choices of judicature can be integrated to the maximum extent.