作者：郭华
作者介绍：中央财经大学法学院教授
出版日期：2023年10月9日
内容提要 鉴定意见作为证据应当符合“明确”的证据要求。现实中的不确定鉴定意见因与司法对证据要求的“明确”或者“确定”存在表达上的冲突，致使实践衍生出鉴定和司法之间实然关系的供需紧张。鉴定意见基于科学不确定性、鉴定技术局限性以及鉴定人主观性等特点，具有不同于其他证据的判断性特征。不确定鉴定意见因包含了特定程度的确定性，具有帮助法官理解专门性问题的功能或者协助其他证据证明事实存在（不）可能性的专家证言属性，发挥着审查判断其他证据和佐证等证明作用。其中，经验型和检验型不确定意见、倾向肯定和倾向否定的意见以及不同主体（控辩双方）提供的不确定意见具有不同的证明分量。区分不确定鉴定意见不同的证明功能，并附加作出不确定鉴定意见的鉴定人特有的说明、解释与论证义务，不仅能发挥不确定鉴定意见佐证以及强化或者弱化其他证据的作用，也能够消解其适用风险。
关键词 不确定鉴定意见 倾向性鉴定意见 证据属性 佐证功能
Abstract: Expert opinions as evidence should meet the evidential requirement of ‘clarity'. The uncertain expert opinion in reality has conflicts with the judicial requirements for 'clarity'or'certainty'in terms of expression, resulting in the tension of the actual relationship between the supply of expert opinion evidence and the demand for the judiciary derived in practice. Based on the characteristics of scientific uncertainty, technical limitations and subjectivity of experts, the evidence of expert opinion has the characteristics of subjective judgment different from other evidence. The statement of uncertain expert opinion contains a specific degree of certainty, which has the function of helping the judge understand Abstract: Expert opinions as evidence should meet the evidential requirement of ‘clarity’. The uncertain expert opinion in reality has conflicts with the judicial requirements for ‘clarity’ or ‘certainty’ in terms of expression, resulting in the tension of the actual relationship between the supply of expert opinion evidence and the demand for the judiciary derived in practice. Based on the characteristics of scientific uncertainty, technical limitations and subjectivity of experts, the evidence of expert opinion has the characteristics of subjective judgment different from other evidence. The statement of uncertain expert opinion contains a specific degree of certainty, which has the function of helping the judge understand specialized issues or assisting other evidence to prove the possibility (impossibility) of the existence of the fact. Therefore, the uncertain expert opinion plays the role in reviewing and judging other evidence and supporting evidence. Among them, empirical uncertain opinions, testing uncertain opinions, opinions with positive tendency and negative tendency, and uncertain opinions provided by different parties (both the prosecution and the defense) have different evidentiary weight. Distinguishing their different evidential functions, and attaching specific explanation, interpretation and argumentation obligations to the expert who makes uncertain expert opinions can not only play the role of supporting evidence and strengthening or weakening other evidence, but also eliminate their applicable risks.
