This article analyses Chinese traditional evidence theories that have evolved over a long period of time, to explore which theory, between objectivity and relevancy, best represents the basic attribute and logical thr...This article analyses Chinese traditional evidence theories that have evolved over a long period of time, to explore which theory, between objectivity and relevancy, best represents the basic attribute and logical thread of evidence. These theories are considered in the context of issues arising in evidential adjudication, including： the ＂Mirror of Evidence,＂ truth, the probability of proof standard, the choice between a notion of pursuing 100-percent certainty in adjudication and that wrongful acquittals are better than wrongful convictions, and the statutory proof doctrine comparedwith the system of free proof. Finally, the article presents the framework of and methods for drafting provisions of procedural evidence of the People＇s Court.展开更多
In the context of Chinese evidence law,the role of the expert asistant is to"offer opinion on the forensic expertise or specialized issues."This role is multiple facet,somewhat similar to a lawyer's role...In the context of Chinese evidence law,the role of the expert asistant is to"offer opinion on the forensic expertise or specialized issues."This role is multiple facet,somewhat similar to a lawyer's role,and to some extent similar to that of a forensic expert or a witness.For this simple reason,the views on the legal status of opinions of the expert assistant also vary from“cross-examination method,""forensic expertise"to"witmess tcstimony."This confusion regarding the role of the expert assistant often results in ifcultics in deciding whether to admit the expert assistant opinion as evidence at trial.The regulation that the expert assistant opinion"can be taken as evidence for determining facts of a case after cross-examination"stipulated in Paragraph 2 of Article 15 of the Supreme People's Court Interpretation of the Law in the Conduct of Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigations promulgated in 2015 could be seen as trends of a transition in the role of the expert assistant towards that of the expert witness.This article atempts to analyze reasons,sigificance,and prospects of sucha transition,and give suggestions to improve the application of examination rules for the expert winess and admissibility rules for scientifc evidence.展开更多
基金This article is funded by the Major Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China titled ＂Research on Models of Evidence Evaluation and Their Application Based on Management and Forensic Decisions＂ （Program NO. 71371188）. We thank Prof. David R. A. Caruso at University of Adelaide, Australia for his helpful comments on the article.
文摘This article analyses Chinese traditional evidence theories that have evolved over a long period of time, to explore which theory, between objectivity and relevancy, best represents the basic attribute and logical thread of evidence. These theories are considered in the context of issues arising in evidential adjudication, including： the ＂Mirror of Evidence,＂ truth, the probability of proof standard, the choice between a notion of pursuing 100-percent certainty in adjudication and that wrongful acquittals are better than wrongful convictions, and the statutory proof doctrine comparedwith the system of free proof. Finally, the article presents the framework of and methods for drafting provisions of procedural evidence of the People＇s Court.
文摘In the context of Chinese evidence law,the role of the expert asistant is to"offer opinion on the forensic expertise or specialized issues."This role is multiple facet,somewhat similar to a lawyer's role,and to some extent similar to that of a forensic expert or a witness.For this simple reason,the views on the legal status of opinions of the expert assistant also vary from“cross-examination method,""forensic expertise"to"witmess tcstimony."This confusion regarding the role of the expert assistant often results in ifcultics in deciding whether to admit the expert assistant opinion as evidence at trial.The regulation that the expert assistant opinion"can be taken as evidence for determining facts of a case after cross-examination"stipulated in Paragraph 2 of Article 15 of the Supreme People's Court Interpretation of the Law in the Conduct of Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigations promulgated in 2015 could be seen as trends of a transition in the role of the expert assistant towards that of the expert witness.This article atempts to analyze reasons,sigificance,and prospects of sucha transition,and give suggestions to improve the application of examination rules for the expert winess and admissibility rules for scientifc evidence.
