Chapter IV
JUDICIAL EXPERTISE ACTIVITIES
Article 24.- Solicitation of judicial expertise
1. Judicial expertise solicitors may solicit the following individuals, organizations:
a) The judicial expertise performers defined in Article 7 of this Ordinance;
b) The judicial expertise organizations defined in Chapter III of this Ordinance;
c) Professional organizations with adequate professional conditions and material foundations to ensure the expertise performance.
2. In cases where the professional capabilities, the conditions on expertise equipment, facilities and means of the domestic judicial expertise organizations, professional organizations and judicial expertise performers fail to meet the expertise requirements, the subordinate procedure-conducting agencies shall propose their central-level procedure-conducting agencies to solicit foreign expertise individuals or organizations. The solicitation of foreign expertise individuals and organizations shall be effected through the Justice Ministry.
Article 25.- Rights of judicial expertise solicitors
1. To solicit organizations or individuals for performance of expertise.
2. To request organizations or individuals solicited for expertise to return the expertising conclusions strictly according to the requested contents and time limit.
3. To request judicial expertise performers to explain the expertising conclusions.
4. Other rights prescribed by procedural legislation.
Article 26.- Obligations of expertise solicitors
1. To solicit expertise in writing.
2. To supply information and/or documents related to expertised objects at the requests of judicial expertise performers.
3. To advance expertise expenses when so requested by individuals, organizations solicited for judicial expertise.
4. Other obligations prescribed by procedural legislation.
Article 27.- Written solicitation of expertise
1. A written expertise solicitation shall include the following principal contents:
a) Name of the expertise - soliciting organization; full name of the procedure-conducting person soliciting the expertise;
b) Name of the solicited organization; full name of the solicited individual;
c) Summary of matters related to the to be-expertised object;
d) Origin and characteristics of the expertised object;
e) Names of relevant documents or accompanying comparative samples;
f) Contents requested for expertise;
g) Date of soliciting the expertise and the deadline for return of expertising conclusions.
2. Where additional expertise or re-expertise is solicited, the written expertise solicitation must clearly state that it is the additional expertise or re-expertise.
Article 28.- Acceptance of expertise solicitation
1. Judicial expertise organizations, professional organizations, judicial expertise performers managed by the provincial-level People's Committees shall have to accept and perform the expertises solicited by procedure-conducting agencies, procedure-conducting persons at the district, provincial or central level.
2. Judicial expertise organizations, professional organizations, judicial expertise performers managed by ministries, ministerial-level agencies or Government-attached agencies shall have to accept and perform the expertises solicited by procedure-conducting agencies, procedure-conducting persons at the central level and complicated expertises solicited by procedure-conducting agencies or persons at the district or provincial level.
3. Judicial expertise organizations, professional organizations, judicial expertise performers must refuse to take the expertise solicitations if they have not enough equipment, facilities and means for expertise performance or the contents requested for expertise do not fall in their respective professional field or fall beyond their professional capability.
4. Basing himself/herself on the provisions in Clauses 1, 2 and 3 of this Article, the Defense Minister shall guide the acceptance of expertise solicitations by procedure-conducting agencies in the army.
Article 29.- Delivery and receipt of expertised objects
1. Where the expertise solicitation is accompanied with to be- expertised objects, the delivery and receipt thereof must be effected with written records. A written record on expertise object delivery and receipt shall include the following principal contents:
a) Time and place for delivery and receipt of to be- expertised object;
b) Full names of the representatives of the expertise object-delivering and receiving parties;
c) Name of the expertised object;
d) Method of preserving the expertised objects upon the delivery and receipt thereof;
e) The conditions of the expertised objects upon delivery and receipt;
f) Relevant documents or objects;
g) Signatures of the deliverer and the receiver.
2. The delivery and receipt of expertised objects after the expertise is completed shall comply with the Government's regulations.
Article 30.- Expertise performance
1. Where judicial expertise organizations or professional organizations solicited for expertise, the heads of such organizations shall appoint the judicial expertise performers and bear responsibility for the appointment of such persons. The expertise performers shall bear personal liability before law for the expertising conclusions.
2. Where individuals are solicited for expertise performance, they shall accept and perform the expertises. The heads of their managing organizations shall have to create conditions for them to perform the expertises.
Article 31.- Personal expertise, collective expertise
1. Personal expertise means the expertise performed by a person. Collective expertise means the expertise performed by two or more persons.
2. In case of personal expertise, the expertise performers shall perform the entire expertise and take responsibility for their expertising conclusions.
3. In case of collective expertise of a professional field, the expertise performers shall jointly perform the expertise, sign the common written expertising conclusions and jointly bear the responsibility for such expertising conclusions; in case of divergent opinions, each expertise performer shall write his/her own conclusion in the common written expertising conclusions and bear responsibility for such opinion.
In case of collective expertise of many different professional domains, each expertise performer shall perform the expertise work falling under his/her own professional domain and bear responsibility for his/her expertising conclusions.
Article 32.- Additional expertise
1. The additional expertise shall be carried out in cases where the contents of the expertising conclusions are unclear, inadequate or when arise new matters related to the details of the cases with previous expertising conclusions.
2. The additional expertise can be performed by the previous judicial expertise performer or other judicial expertise performers.
Article 33.- Re-expertise
1. The re-expertise shall be carried out at the requests of procedure-conducting agencies or persons in case of doubt about the expertising results or contradiction between expertising conclusions on the same expertised matters. The re-expertise may be carried out by the previous or other expertise performers according to the provisions of procedural legislation.
2. In case of contradictions between the conclusions of the first expertise and the re-expertise conclusions on the same expertised matters, the second re-expertises must be effected by the expertise councils. The expertise councils shall be set up under decisions of ministers, heads of ministerial-level agencies, heads of Government-attached agencies managing the domains which need to be expertised. Such an expertise council is composed of at least three members with high professional qualifications and prestige in the to be- expertised domains.
3. Where the expertise councils defined in Clause 2 of this Article has already performed the second re-expertise, no more re-expertise shall be carried out, except for special cases decided by the chairman of the Supreme People's Procuracy.
Article 34.- Written acknowledgement of expertising process
1. The expertise performers must promptly, fully and truthfully acknowledge in writing the entire expertising process.
2. The written acknowledgement of the expertising process must be included in the expertise dossiers.
Article 35.- Expertising conclusions
1. The expertising conclusions must be made in writing with the following principal contents:
a) Full name of the expertise performer;
b) Name of the procedure-conducting agency or full name of the procedure-conducting person that solicits the expertise; the serial number of the written solicitation of expertise;
c) Time of receiving the written solicitation of expertise;
d) Contents requested for expertise;
e) Expertising methods;
f) Conclusions on the expertised objects;
g) Time and place of expertise completion.
2. The written expertising conclusions must be signed by the judicial expertise performers; in cases where organizations are solicited for expertise, the expertising conclusions must also be signed and stamped by the heads of such organizations.
3. In cases where the expertise is carried out before the issuance of decision to institute a criminal case, strictly according to the order and procedures prescribed by the procedural legislation and this Ordinance, the procedure-conducting agency may not solicit expertise any more but use the conclusions of such expertise as the judicial expertise conclusions.
Article 36.- Expertise dossiers
1. The expertise dossiers shall be compiled by the judicial expertise performers and comprise the following documents:
a) Decisions to solicit expertise;
b) Records on delivery and receipt of expertised objects;
c) Written acknowledgement of the expertising process;
d) The expertise photos;
e) The previous expertising conclusions or results of expertise testing, experimentation performed by other persons;
f) Other documents related to the expertise;
g) Expertising conclusions.
2. The expertise dossiers shall be archived for at least thirty years counting from the date of concluding the expertise, except otherwise provided for by law.
The judicial expertise organizations, the professional organizations shall have to preserve and archive the dossiers on expertises conducted by the judicial expertise performers in their organizations.
3. The expertise dossiers must be presented at the requests of procedure-conducting organizations or persons, that are handling the cases.
Article 37.- Cases not entitled to conduct judicial expertises
Those who fall into one of the following cases must not conduct judicial expertises:
1. Having conducted procedures in their capacity as investigator, procurator, judge, juror, court clerk or have participated in the procedures in their capacity as counsel, defenders of legitimate rights and interests of the involved parties, witness or interpreter in such cases;
2. Being concurrently the victim, civil plaintiff, civil defendant; persons with rights and interests related to the cases; the lawful representatives, relatives of those persons or defendants, the accused;
3. Being solicited for re-expertise of the same contents in a case for which they already performed the expertise, except otherwise provided for by law;
4. Having other clear grounds to believe that such persons are not impartial in performing the expertise.
Tìm kiếm
Pháp lệnh Giám định tư pháp (Bản Word)