国产热热热精品,亚洲视频久久】日韩,三级婷婷在线久久,99人妻精品视频,精品九热人人肉肉在线,AV东京热一区二区,91po在线视频观看,久久激情宗合,青青草黄色手机视频

USEUROPEAFRICAASIA 中文雙語(yǔ)Fran?ais
Opinion
Home / Opinion / Opinion Line

Clear charging standards for judicial expertise required

China Daily | Updated: 2017-02-10 07:59

A LAWYER FROM CHENGDU in Southwest China's Sichuan province has revealed on his micro blog that the cost of the judicial expertise for a case, which involved checking a signature, a fingerprint and two stamps, was 170,000 yuan ($24,767). The judicial expertise agency responded that it followed a national charging regulation. However, that regulation was abolished last May. Lao Yue, a retired prosecutor, commented on Beijing News:

When the incident was reported by media outlets, the judicial expertise agency said that there is no new regulation yet so it followed the old one. This is a poor defense because as soon as a regulation is abolished, it is no longer law and cannot be quoted as legal support for any actions.

Actually, ever since it was jointly issued by the National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Justice in 2009, the old regulation has been blamed for setting too high charging standards. According to the regulation, the price of judicial expertise was set as a certain percentage of the claim; but many argued that the cost of judicial expertise has nothing to do with how much money is involved in a judicial case. The judicial experts spend the same time and energy identifying each signature and fingerprint, no matter how big a deal it involves.

That's why the National Development and Reform Commission, the top economic planner, abolished the regulation. It also made it clear that before a new regulation comes into effect, the charging of judicial expertise should be co-decided by government price departments and judicial administrative departments at the provincial level. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the judicial expertise agency in the case is wrong and it should not have charged as it did.

Lack of proper charging standards is only one of the chaotic situations in the judicial expertise sector. In order to ensure their independence, the law requires judicial expertise agencies to be third-party agencies affiliated to no judicial agency, but some agencies run like commercial companies. Some of them overcharge, while some of them abuse the power by giving false results in certain cases after taking bribes.

To ensure justice, it is time that judicial departments at various levels better regulated these judicial expertise agencies.

Most Viewed in 24 Hours
Copyright 1995 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

Registration Number: 130349
FOLLOW US
太谷县| 尖扎县| 新源县| 错那县| 禹州市| 潜山县| 五家渠市| 桂林市| 博兴县| 玛曲县| 宁乡县| 乌鲁木齐市| 华阴市| 黑河市| 夹江县| 新巴尔虎右旗| 邯郸市| 茌平县| 三穗县| 贡山| 浦东新区| 彭阳县| 弋阳县| 崇信县| 广宗县| 梅州市| 威信县| 绥化市| 六安市| 灵山县| 盐亭县| 克什克腾旗| 宣汉县| 云和县| 柳江县| 桑日县| 花莲县| 密云县| 邢台市| 吉木乃县| 大兴区|