关键词: 司法鉴定制度, 程序理性, 技术理性, 协同治理, 本土化重构

Abstract: Using procedural rationality as the theoretical framework, this study systematically deconstructs the reform mechanism of the French forensic appraisal system and its implications for China’s judicial reform. Through the dual filtering mechanism of the roster system, the three-tier procedural supervision system, and the remedy mechanism based on collective rationality, France has established a collaborative governance framework integrating technical rationality and judicial authority, and has realized the judicial transformation of scientific judgments. However, the system still faces inherent tensions, including the paradox of cognitive dependence, the potential danger of power concentration, and the challenge of algorithmic black boxes, driving France to achieve dynamic adjustments through reforms such as strengthening judges’ obligation of technical review, introducing checks and balances in roster selection, and codifying algorithmic transparency into law. The French experience reveals the core logic that procedure takes precedence over technology. First, China should abandon the inertia of administrative management, promote the transformation of legislation from management-oriented law to procedure-oriented law, and incorporate review rules for technical disputes by amending the three major procedural laws. Second, China should build a two-track roster system (technical access review by the Ministry of Justice and ethical review by the Supreme People’s Court), and transform the principle of fault-based liability in the French Civil Code into a lifelong accountability system for forensic appraisers. Third, through the establishment of a technical judge system and the enhancement of the cross-examination rights of expert assistants, China should realize the coordination between professional autonomy and public participation under judicial guidance, thereby bridging the gap between technical rationality and judicial justice. Ultimately, procedural rationality becomes the embodied carrier of justice. Its value lies not in eliminating scientific uncertainty, but in transforming technical disputes into a productive force for judicial consensus through an institutionalized dialogue mechanism.

Key words: forensic appraisal system, procedural rationality, technical rationality, collaborative governance, localized reconstruction