Reforming the Expert Evidence System in Taiwan Criminal Justice: Lessons from the United States

臺灣刑事司法制度中專家證據之改革：美國法的借鏡

關於如何在訴訟中解決科學爭議，我國刑事訴訟法係採鑑定制度以為處理之機制。鑑於美國法制係以專家證人制度解決訴訟可能涉及之科學爭議，本文乃基於美國有關專家證人之法制與實務，分析檢討我國法制之不足。此外，本文更探討司法院過去曾提出的專家參審條例草案之所存在之瑕疵，並參照美國學說上之建議，主張應以專家陪審制度，作為解決訴訟中科學爭議之機制，期以有效與合理地解決相關爭議。

 

As Professor Thomas Weigend once mentioned, “Theoretically, the German system of court-appointed expert witnesses should make for a neutral, detached role of experts, in contrast to the “hired gun” syndrome in adversarial system.” However, expert witnesses in Taiwan are not presumed to play an advocate role in favor of one party as those in an accusatorial system. Since communication between expert witnesses and the trier of fact is basically different between these two criminal procedural approaches, this paper reviews the proposed Draft aiming to reform the expert evidence system in Taiwan from the perspective of the United States. Instead of adopting the proposed draft, this study suggests that the lawmakers should adopt the so-called “Blue Ribbon Expert Jury” to resolve all highly complex scientific or technical issues.