Abstract: The supervision legislation clarifies the legal evidentiary qualifications of appraisal opinions. Appraisal opinions are mainly applicable to bribery and embezzlement cases in supervision, with judicial accounting and price determination as the main types. The defendants and defense lawyers’ questions focus on the appraisal methods, appraisal subjects, and appraisal procedures, but the judges’ review of the appraisal opinions is relatively formal, and almost all of the appraisal opinions submitted by the Supervision Commission are adopted. Problems such as the low rate of appraisers appearing in court and the ambiguity of the legal status of quasi-appraisal opinions such as price determination reports still exist, which affects the court review and cross-examination effectiveness of appraisal opinions. To improve judges’ review of appraisal opinions, the following actions could be taken：bringing in professional and technical personnel to assist judges in their review, establishing a system of substantive review rules, strengthening the protection of defendants’ procedural rights, and reforming the system for the categorical management of forensic appraisal.

Key words: surveillance case, appraisal opinion, review rule, the right of lawsuit, classification management

摘要： 监察立法明确了鉴定意见的法定证据资格。鉴定意见主要适用于监察案件中受贿、贪污案件，以司法会计、价格认定为主要类型。被告人及辩护律师的质疑聚焦于鉴定方法、鉴定主体和鉴定程序，但法官对鉴定意见的审查较为形式化，几乎全部采纳监察委员会移送的鉴定意见。鉴定人出庭率低，以及价格认定报告等准鉴定意见的法律地位模糊等问题仍然存在，影响鉴定意见的法庭审查和质证效果。要提升法官审查鉴定意见的水平，可以引入专业技术人员辅助法官审查，建立实质化的审查规则体系，强化对被告人的诉讼权利的保护，改革司法鉴定分类管理体制。

关键词:  , 监察案件, 鉴定意见, 审查规则, 诉讼权利, 分类管理