论文部分内容阅读
在美国 ,有一套健全的允许包括法学家在内的案外人向法院提供证据事实和法律意见的制度 ,即“法院之友”制度。我国的法学家出具论证意见书与“法院之友”制度有异曲同工之处 ,目前在我国允许法学家出具论证意见书虽然有一定现实合理性的。但在审判实践中 ,法学家论证意见书有诸多欠规范之处 ,我们应该借鉴美国“法院之友”制度的合理因素 ,制定规范法学家论证意见书的法规 ,健全法学家出具论证意见书的相关程序。
In the United States, there is a sound system of allowing foreigners, including jurists, to provide evidence and factual opinions to the courts, namely the “Friends of the Courts.” At present, there are similarities and differences between the jurists in our country issuing legal arguments and the system of “friends of the courts.” Although there is a certain degree of realistic and reasonable justification for allowing legal scholars to issue argumentations in our country at present. However, in the trial practice, the jurists have many irregularities on the demonstration of opinions. We should learn from the reasonable factors of the “system of the Friends of the Court” in the United States, formulate laws and regulations to regulate the legalists ’opinions, improve the legal experts’ Related procedures.