关键词: 有专门知识的人, 专家辅助人, 专家证人, 专门性证据

Abstract: The judicial interpretations promulgated in recent years grant rights to people with expertise (experts) testifying in court，which has gone beyond the original intention of the procedural law, and the role positioning and opinion nature of experts need to be re-examined and defined. In order to protect the right of cross-examination, the legislation should not set obstacles for the defendant to apply for expert appearance in court. The current legislation does not require that experts testifying in court must have the qualification of appraisers, but it does not mean that experts do not need to have the conditions to reflect their professional knowledge advantages, only in this way can the opinion rule be applied. The basic function of experts participating in court hearings is to assist one party to cross-examine evidence, thus testifying is an expanded function entrusted to experts by judicial interpretation. The existing regulations lead to the ambiguity of the role of experts, and there are some restrictive factors in the process of the transition from expert assistant to expert witness, such as litigation structure and legalism of evidence. The opinions of testifying in court have a multi-layer nature of attribution, and the opinions regarding expert opinions can be understood as the refutation of evidence. The nature of expert opinions on specialized issues is similar to counterevidence, such opinions have the attribute of evidence, which can be classified into the category of specialized evidence to be cross-examined.

Key words: person with expertise, expert assistant, expert witness, specialized evidence