On Judicial Authentication As Criminal Investigation

Judicial authentication is the application of science and technology or expertise to resolve the special issues involved in litigation, and provide expert opinions in litigation. It plays the role to objectively, accurately and timely record and fix traces and evidence to which are given an objective judgment by using the scientific identification and analysis in order to identify the reasons for the formation of certain facts and conditions. Meanwhile, it can provide a scientific recall on the process of some cases, and use specialized knowledge to determine similarities and differences between the case object for the efficient and accurate basis to carry out litigation activities. With the rapid social and economic development, judicial authentication as a litigation means is to more and more frequently be applied in social life. The investigation organs' judicial authentication as a part of forensic activities, due to various reasons, there is still some controversy. How to understand the nature of investigation organs' judicial authentication, and in practice to strengthen its management, in reality it has become very necessary. The author intends to make a study of judicial authentication of investigation action from three aspects.The first part is to study the basic position for judicial authentication in investigation in China. Judicial authentication mentioned in this paper according to the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on the Administration of Judicial Authentication, refers to an act that science and technology or expertise are used to judge upon special issues involved in lawsuit and to offer expert opinions. Judicial authentication has the dual property of science and legality which determines the forensic activities must follow the principles of legitimacy, independence and neutrality.In the investigation Activities, forensic investigations play an irreplaceable important role to provide the basis for the filing and clues for the investigation of the case, fix the evidence, review and verify other evidence. The judicial authentication during investigation is part of forensic activities, but because in a specific sector it should follow the scientific, fair, timely and independent working principles. At present, China's judicial authentication institutions of investigation organs are in the prosecution agency and the public security organs. The authentication content are often based on the functions of investigation and closely related to investigation activities. The Judicial authenticators of investigation organs therefore receive the dual management and have the dual identities of public officials and authenticators.The second part is to analyze the main problems of judicial authentication in the investigation. There are three major shortcomings in practice. The management system of judicial authentication institutions has yet to be straightened, and the position of judicial authenticator is not clear enough, and more, the right of parties in forensic activities is difficult to be fully protected. Because of defects in the legislation, there exist multiple management of judicial authentication institutions and judicial authenticators, and serious phenomenon of self-investigation and self-examination, with the addition of inconsistent standards for authentication, all that lead to weak credibility of expert conclusion. Imperfections of the authentication starting procedure system and the expert conclusion' evidence conformation system, together with the insufficient protection for parties' authentication right, result in being lack of effective supervision and confrontation, and further reduce the objectivity and fairness about expert conclusion.The third part is to propose the adjustment measures in detail, according to the existing problems in judicial authentication. The author holds a view that, it's difficult to have a more substantial changes for the current judicial authentication system, but possible to adjust it for local. For the problems of management system, it should be limited to the functions of judicial authentication institutions which shall not accept other than the authentication business of investigation activities, and be retained only when they are compatible with the essential authentication matters. To separate the authentication institution from investigation organs and to raise its administrative level as same as investigation organs, will be effectively resist the adverse effects that may be imposed by investigation organs. Meanwhile, authentication standards should be unified, and further refine the relevant standards and implementation rules, based on the Decision. For disorientation of authenticator, it should make clear that the primary identity of authenticators is a participant in the litigation, and as physical person with a specialized expertise to solve the special problems, they are with the basic properties of judicial authentication and engaged in activities of scientific evidence. Since they are participants in the litigation, then they must fulfill the obligations of giving testimony in court and accept the court cross-examination and inquiry. For weak protection of the rights for the parties, they should learn from foreign experiences to give equal rights as investigation organs to apply for the authentication starting, in order to form an effective supervision for authentication institutions of investigation organs. When the parties do not want authentication institutions of investigation organs to identify, the handling bodies should entrust other authentication institutions in time to make a convincing case processing. the expert advisor system should be Established in order to help the parties realize the rights related to authentication. At the same time, the relief program should be improved to prevent the arbitrary administration of justice, and to avoid the application for the authentication starting existing in name only.In conclusion, the author emphasizes judicial authentication in investigation in China is an important part of the judicial authentication system. To solve the problems, the most fundamental is the uniform legislation, which is to eliminate cognitive dissonances and departmental interests, and to implement the unified management of judicial authentication, so that it can speed up the development process of legalization, standardization and institutionalization of our judicial authentication in investigation organs.