The Defects And Perfection Of The Current General Rule Of Judicial Authentication Procedure

As an important part of the judicial authentication system,the judicial authentication procedure system plays a key role in the litigation and identification activities.Adhering to the principle of "improving the quality of identification,focusing on optimizing the identification process,adhering to the principle of problem oriented,focusing on solving the outstanding problems in practice ",the reform of forensic expertise is keeping steady and moving forward.The general rule of procedure of judicial appraisal in 2016 revised "(hereinafter referred to as" the general rule ")the introduction,is the key to the reform of judicial authentication system in China and improve step program it to strengthen the regulation of judicial appraisal,attorney and procedure to improve the withdrawal system,expert witnesses and other content,and the contents of supervision in the entity the level and identification procedures and identification process to strengthen and improve the quality of the judicial authentication control as a supplement.It marks China's emphasis on judicial appraisal work,reflects the steady pace of China's step in the rule of law on the road,the old general rule has not been able to solve the new problems.under the request of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China" the results are consistent with the substantive justice and procedural justice in accordance with the handling process”,in the trial centered the litigation system reform trend,improve the judicial authentication procedure is imperative.The new general rule has made great progress in the contents of legislative technology and practical problem solving.It combines entity with procedure,emphasizing the value of identification for litigation service,ensuring the quality of authentication,and the authenticity of appraisal opinions.It is of great value and significance to improving the judicial authentication procedure.But it is undeniable that some regulations of "general" are not good,in order to make the "general" and more operational,can be put in place,and not only made provisions in principle,convergence of the procedural law and the amendment shall,in ensuring parties or litigation rights balance under the reasonable determination of judicial expertise starting the program,select a judicial authentication institution,the basic conditions and procedures to start reappraisal,and the outstanding problems in practice such as reidentification applications especially for the litigation rights of the parties involved will be more restrictive,abuse of procedure of judicial identification system will appear as a result of the development of practice,the content still needs to be standardized.This article is based on the angle of view of identification of criminal activities for the above problems,defects and improvement of current rules for the operation of the content is divided into three parts,first,the new provisions of " the general rule" of comparative analysis,pointed out that reflected the old regulations clear,paving the way for the following;second,The procedure of judicial appraisal system of extraterritorial provisions are discussed,through the comparison of foreign related provisions are more mature,with the reform of China's judicial expertise procedure system inspiration and reference;third,put forward suggestions on the reform path and methods of China's "the general rule",put forward the countermeasures to improve the cohesion in the trial procedure of identification the general procedure,combined with the identification of issues related to China's practice,the existing judicial identification procedures "general" forward-looking and puts forward some improvement measures.Fourth,Conclusion.A summary of the full text,the expression of hope for the road of reform,the reform process in the theoretical construction to play a role in guiding the development of appropriate practice,its significance lies not only on the construction of expert opinion can make more accord with the substantive justice,the identification process is more in line with the identification system of procedural justice,procedural rules to identify more operational,to solve the defects that the current specification is not clear,what the more important is to enable the identification of industry norms mature,so it can give full play to its litigation value.