Abstract: The reformation of the forensic system not only brings changes to the forensic system ， but also contributed to the improvement of the evidence’s rules. As one kind of legal evidence， the“expert opinion” no longer has the effect of appraisal conclusions， but like other evidence， it should be reviewed by the court in respect of admissibility of evidence and probative force. Expert opinions should be rejected by the court if the evidence violates the qualification， procedure， method and the form of identification veports. The rule to admissibility of expert opinions as evidence contributes to the the implementation of legal procedure， and strengthen the probative force. For the development of the Criminal Evidence Act， expert opinion in the micro-level will have more system space， when only the judicial system in the macro-level and the identification procedures in the meso-level have substantive changes.

Key words: expert opinion, forensic system, identification procedure, evidence qualification, probative force

摘要： 司法鉴定制度的改革不仅带来了司法鉴定体制的变化，而且促成了相关证据规则的完善。作为一种法定的证据种类，“鉴定意见”不再具有“鉴定结论”的效力，而要像其他证据一样，在证明力和证据能力方面经受法庭上的审查过程。违背法定的鉴定主体资格、鉴定程序、鉴真方法或鉴定文书的形式要件，鉴定人所提供的鉴定意见应被排除于法庭之外。有关鉴定意见的证据能力规则，不仅维护了法律程序的实施，而且可最大限度地增强该证据的证明力。从未来刑事证据法发展的角度来看，只有在宏观层面的司法体制和中观层面的鉴定程序方面发生实质性的变化，处于微观层面的鉴定证据规则才能有更大的制度空间。

关键词: 鉴定意见, 鉴定体制, 鉴定程序, 证据能力, 证明力