Opinion 1/15 of the Grand Chamber dated 26 July 2017 about the agreement on Passenger Name Record data between the EU and Canada

On 26 July 2017, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice rendered its seminal Opinion 1/15 about the agreement on Passenger Name Record data between the EU and Canada. The Grand Chamber considered that the decision of the Council about the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the agreement between the EU and Canada about the transfer and processing of PNR data must be based jointly on Article 16(2) about the protection of personal data and Article 87(2)(a) about police co-operation among member states in criminal matters, but not on Article 82(1)(d) about judicial co-operation in criminal matters in the EU of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. The Grand Chamber also considered that the agreement is incompatible with Article 7 on the right to respect for private life, Article 8 on the right to the protection of personal data, Article 21 on non-discrimination and Article 52(1) on the principle of proportionality of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU since it does not preclude the transfer, use and retention of sensitive data. In addition to the requirement to exclude such data, the Grand Chamber listed seven requirements that the agreement must include, specify, limit or guarantee to be compatible with the Charter.The opinion of the Grand Chamber has far-reaching implications for the agreement on PNR data between the EU and Canada. It has also far-reaching implications for international agreements on PNR data between the EU and other third states. Last, it has far-reaching implications for Directive 681 of 27 April 2016 on PNR data.     

刍议医疗损害技术鉴定二元化现状的应因之道

《侵权责任法》颁布实施已经2年多,国家立法机关及最高人民法院迟迟没有出台关于医疗损害技术鉴定的法律解释。一些省、直辖市出台了地方性规定,但做法各不相同,理论上并没有彻底解决鉴定二元化的问题。目前部分地区医疗损害司法鉴定似乎出现一种无序状态,严重影响了医疗损害争议案件的解决,急需尽快完善顶层设计,规范鉴定机制,尽快结束鉴定的二元化局面,为医疗损害争议案件诉讼的解决提供保障。     

对建立刑事诉讼专家辅助人制度的思考——以全国首例专家辅助人参与刑事案件为视角

新《刑事诉讼法》中明确了专家辅助人制度的雏形,但是条文的规定简单概括。有关专家辅助人的资格、介入诉讼的方式、权利和义务、启动方式和其意见的可采性等相关问题都没有详细的规定,使其在司法实践运作环节出现许多障碍。构建专家辅助人制度前应准确理解其概念,明确专家辅助人的法律地位,充分认识构建专家辅助人制度的必要性,并建立配套的专家辅助人援助制度。     

Finding the missing and unknown: Novel educational approaches to warming up cold cases

In recent years, students in police academies and higher education institutions around the world have worked together to analyse cold cases including long-term missing persons cases in collaboration with investigators and prosecutors. In 2020, three European organisations, the Police Expert Network on Missing Persons (PEN-MP), AMBER Alert Europe and Locate International, succeeded in connecting these educational organisations enabling them to work collectively on cases and conduct cold case analyses (CCA) across international borders. The International Cold Case Analysis Project (ICCAP) learning objectives were to 1) collect the necessary information about the victim, 2) reconstruct the crime, and 3) investigate trace control.In a learning objective-based evaluation using Computer-Assisted Web Interviewing, 76 participating students from the German and International ICCAP teams were asked to complete a pre- and post-review questionnaire to self-assess their personal competence development. Participants reported significant increases in competence in all evaluated areas, thus demonstrating that authentic and relevant collaborations can enrich the learning environment, promote the use of professional skills, and provide significant knowledge exchange opportunities between academia and industry.Drawing on case studies of cold case missing persons' investigations and unidentified found remains, this article shares how university academics, students and community volunteers can work together nationally and internationally to find out what has happened to missing people and how we can more effectively identify the previously unidentified. In so doing, we share the expertise required to progress these cold cases and provide recommendations to support other institutions and organisations in adopting this innovative approach.     

Does Ambivalent Sexism Influence Verdicts for Heterosexual and Homosexual Defendants in a Self-Defense Case?

The current research examined the role of defendant and participant sex, presence or absence of expert testimony of the “battered person syndrome”, and sexual orientation of the defendant on perceptions of guilt in a self-defense case. The role of sexism in judgments of culpability was also examined. A sample of 442 participants read a self-defense case scenario and responded to questions pertaining to verdict, defendant culpability, legal element ratings, and sexist attitudes. Results revealed a four-way interaction, showing female participants prescribed the lowest guilt ratings to heterosexual female and homosexual male defendants who received expert testimony of the battered person syndrome. When heterosexual male defendants received expert testimony, ratings of guilt significantly increased. A multiple regression was conducted to determine whether legal and extra-legal factors predicted defendant culpability. Sexist attitudes (benevolent sexism towards men and women) and certain legal elements were predictive of defendant culpability. Limitations and implications are discussed. Study findings were presented in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society (APLS), Jacksonville, Florida (March, 2008).     

Expert examination and assessment of state under the influence of psychoactive substances

An expert examination is a medical examination performed by a doctor on the order of a police officer or investigating judge. It includes a clinical examination of the subject, collection of samples for toxicological analysis, and the doctor's assessment of whether the subject is under the influence of psychoactive substances. The doctor requires expert knowledge, skill, experience and sufficient time to successfully perform the examination. Since the accurate assessment of the effects of psychoactive substances present depends on a comprehensive evaluation of toxicological test results, the calculation of results at the time of the event and the results of the medical examination, an unprofessionally performed examination can have far-reaching consequences, primarily legal in nature.     

专家辅助人出庭质证规则研究

现代科学技术的迅猛发展对司法审判产生了巨大的影响,各种科学问题、技术证据、鉴定意见呈现于法庭,法官在审判案件中由于知识和经验的局限性而难以判断,在此背景下专家辅助人制度应运而生。英美法系有专家证人制度,存在完善的以交叉询问为主的专家证人出庭质证规则,大陆法系国家和地区有诉讼辅助人制度,虽然立法中没有明确的出庭质证规则,但是有完善的鉴定人出庭质证规则。我国当前专家辅助人出庭质证规则没有明确的规定,但准用证人出庭质证规则。不过目前缺乏进一步的理论阐述,且简单直接适用也存在问题,同时缺乏系统的、具体的、具有可操作性的质证规则。对此笔者提出构建专家辅助人出庭质证规则的建议。     

知情同意诉讼中的证据学:英美法的观察

在传统的医疗过失侵权诉讼中,为了体现行外人士对医疗这一专家型行业的尊重,医疗专家证言在诉讼中发挥着重要的甚至决定性的作用。知情同意诉讼,虽被归入医疗过失侵权诉讼,却提供了一个不同于传统的医疗领域——诊断治疗——的情景。知情同意的独特性改变了专家证言在诉讼中的格局。在知情同意诉讼中,医疗专家证言的参与度和重要性遭到削弱。以患者为取向的信息披露标准的建立意味着法律的关注点已从"专家"整体转移到"患者";对"医学判断"所管辖领域的精细分割也说明,医疗专家证言只应在证明医疗信息的感知和启用"医疗特权"上有应用价值,医疗信息的实质性判断已让位于一般人知识,而且对"医疗特权"的严格控制会缩减医疗专家证言的适用空间;因果关系的认定和选择影响到医疗专家证言和患者证言的地位变化,尽管存在"事后诸葛"效应,为了与知情同意法则之主旨相匹配,主观化的因果关系应是前进方向。     

Study of the correlation between psychiatric and psychological diagnoses in sample offenders

This study deals with the frequency with which expert psychiatrists and psychologists make structural or nosographic diagnoses within the context of expert assessment.Thus, the rates of concordance between psychiatrists and psychologists in both types of diagnoses will be assessed.To do so, the level of inter-observer agreement on diagnoses between 1990 and 2003 was studied retrospectively in France through psychiatric and psychological assessments of 505 male offenders. The assessment of the correlation rates was carried out using the Kappa coefficient.The results show a range of 0.55 to 0.71 in inter-observer (psychiatrists vs psychologists) agreement for structural diagnoses, and 0.51 to 0.89 for nosographic diagnoses.In addition, a marked correlation between psychiatrists and psychologists may be noted regarding abstention in both structural (k = 66) and nosographic (k = 73) diagnoses. In fact, recommendations are made for improvement in the consistency of offender assessment in the psycho-legal French context.