Reformation of the Judicial Appraisal Adoption System used by Party Institutions Entrusted by the Investigation Agency in Criminal Proceedings

The new requirements of trial-centered litigation in China are a concrete manifestation of the reform of the rule of law under Xi Jinping’s new socialist era.The effective implementation of judicial appraisal lays a solid foundation for the correct identification of facts,accurate conviction,and sentencing,and technically,it should guarantee a fair trial.However,in practice,judicial appraisal opinion carries the risk of a diminished trial that deviates from the trial-centered requirement to substantiate a charge and can easily lead to unjust cases.This paper seeks to discuss the system of identification of property loss involved in criminal proceedings,which is implemented by a third‑party appraisal institution entrusted by the investigation agency,and highlights the fact that the third-party appraisal institutions in judicial practice are currently reliant on cooperative thinking,but countenance the lack of a mechanism for effective accountability,and the court’s propensity for theirsupport.This leads to the verification components of the trial being depreciated,which may lessen the validity of the appraisal opinion(substantiation).In response to this problem,the author hopes to provide some suggestions to assist third-party appraisal agencies in the completion of judicial appraisal and achievement of their trial‑centered reform goal by rationalizing the relationship between the investigation agency and identification institution,establishing a hierarchical accountability mechanism,and improving the rules governing testimony in court.

Analyses of Medical Malpractice in Judicial Appraisal: 505 Cases

The purpose of this paper is to investigate and analyze the current situation of medical malpractice and make suggestions for preventative measures from a judicial appraisal standpoint.From 2002 to 2011,we conducted and analyzed 505 medicolegal malpractice experiments at the Fada Institute of Forensic Medicine and Science(FIFMS)in Beijing,People’s Republic of China(PRC).We found that the occurrence of medical disputes in surgical and obstetrical/gynecological cases seemed more frequent.The main causes of medical disputes included issues regarding medical ethics,poor quality of the medical staff,equipment malfunctions,and dereliction of duty by the medical personnel.The reasons for dissatisfaction varied among the different levels of medical service.Basic medical services garnered the most complaints.If we can work to improve the moral and professional standards of the medical staff members,intensify their ethics,and foster good relationships between patients and medical professionals,the quality of medical care would improve and the number of disputes regarding medical services would be reduced.

Evaluation of Medical Malpractice Litigations in China, 2002–2011

In the past 10 years,medical malpractice litigations have become a serious public health and social issues in China.This study aims to evaluate the medical malpractice litigations in Beijing.A retrospective study was conducted using the database from the Key Laboratory of Evidence Science(KLES)at China University of Political Science and Law(CUPL)to demonstrate the extent and characteristics of the alleged medical malpractice cases and the conclusions of forensic evaluation from 2002 to 2011 in Beijing.A total of 1515 alleged medical malpractice cases were investigated by forensic medical experts at KLES‑CUPL during the study period.Of the 1515 cases,45.2%were male patients and 54.8%were female patients.The age of the patients ranged from newborn to 90 years,with average age of 44 years.The alleged medical malpractice cases involved 11.3%of newborns.From 2002 to 2006,the average number of medical malpractice litigations was 123 cases per year,while from 2007 to 2011,the average number of medical malpractice litigations was 180 per year,a 46%increase.Of the 1515 cases,588(38.8%)litigations were due to the patients’death.Clinical departments involved in claims most often were obstetrics(18.9%),followed by orthopedics(15.1%)and general surgery(11.5%).Medical error was found in 945(62.4%)cases.Of the 945 confirmed medical malpractice cases,the top medical misadventures were diagnostic errors(36.5%),improper performance of procedures(36.4%),and medication error(12.6%).Although tertiary hospitals were more likely to be sued than the secondary and primary hospitals(63.6%vs.36.4%),there was no significant difference between tertiary and secondary hospitals in the percentage of confirmed malpractice cases(62.3%vs.59.4%).The primary hospitals had the highest confirmed malpractice cases(73.2%).