民事诉讼证据中有关鉴定的诠释与规则适用探讨

新《民事证据规定》涉及鉴定条款占所有条款数量的四分之一,其中,新增条款又约占整个鉴定条款的60%。这种大幅度对鉴定问题的修订,彰显出鉴定在民事证据中的重要地位与实践中的突出作用。这些有关鉴定条款的修改、新增和删除,除理顺民事证据规定与民事诉讼法及其相关解释的关系和回应民众对鉴定的需求外,侧重于人民法院对鉴定委托的管理和对鉴定人活动的规范。具体体现为加强鉴定委托管理、强化鉴定人出庭作证、限制鉴定人撤销鉴定意见、严格鉴定人承诺和作虚假鉴定等方面的责任,尤其是鉴定费用退回的制裁方式。但也存在规范鉴定人和法官行为的失衡,以及条款间及其与相关司法解释的不协调问题等。对此需要在尊重诉讼规律、科学规律和证据规则本质的基础上,以司法改革、司法鉴定制度改革以及与相关法律、司法解释衔接和协调的综合视角对有关鉴定的规定作出理论诠释与适用说明,不宜孤立地解释条款的字面含义,以免导致实践适用上的失控。

The interpretation of judicial expertise and discussion on application of rules in civil litigation evidence

The new provisions on Civil Evidence involve judicial expertise, accounting for one-fourth of all provisions. Among them, the newly added clause accounts for sixty percent of the whole appraisal clause. The revision of the appraisal by a large margin shows that appraisal plays an important role in civil evidence and practice. The modification, addition and deletion of these authentication clauses can not only straighten out the amendment of civil procedure law, but also explain and respond to the public’s demand for authentication, focusing on the people’s court’s management of appraisal entrustment and the standardization of appraiser’s activities. These management approaches include, for instance, strengthening the management of appraisal entrustment, strengthening the responsibilities of the appraisers to testify in court, limiting the appraisers to revoke the appraisal opinions, strictly enforcing the appraisers’ promises and making false appraisal, especially the sanctions on the return of appraisal fees. But there are also some problems, such as the imbalance of regulating the behavior of appraisers and judges, and the inconsistency between different clauses and their relevant judicial interpretations. On the basis of respecting the nature of procedural law, scientific law and evidence rule, it needs to explain and apply the relevant identification rules from the perspective of judicial reform, judicial identification system reform and the integration and coordination with relevant laws and judicial interpretations. It is not advisable to explain the literal meaning of the clause in isolation, so as not to cause out of control in practice.