(Adopted at the 14th Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People’s Congress on February 28, 2005)
In order to improve the regulation of the evaluation by experts and institutions, meet the needs of judicial organs, citizens and organizations in litigations, and ensure the smooth conduct of legal proceedings, the Standing Committee has hereby made the decision as follows:
1. “Expert evaluation” means the activities conducted by evaluation experts during litigations to evaluate and determine the special issues involved in the litigations by using scientific and technological means or special knowledge and to provide expert opinions thereof.
2. The State establishes a registration system for regulation of the following evaluations conducted experts and institutions:
(1) medico-legal identification;
(2) physical evidence evaluation;
(3) audio-visual material identification; and
(4) other evaluations conducted by experts and institutions which should be registered, as decided, according to the requirement of legal proceedings, by the administrative department of justice under the State Council, after consultation with the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate.
Where there are different provisions of law on the regulation of the matters provided for in the preceding paragraph concerning the evaluation experts and institutions, such provisions shall be applied.
3. The administrative department of justice under the State Council shall be in charge of the work of registration and regulation with regard to the evaluation experts and institutions nationwide. The administrative departments of justice under the people’s governments at the provincial level shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Decision, be responsible for the registration of, and the compilation of a directory of, the evaluation experts and institutions, as well as the publication of the registration and the directory.
4. Persons who possess one of the following qualifications may apply for registration to practise in the area of expert evaluation:
(1) having the senior technical titles relating to what they apply for;
(2) having the professional qualifications for practice or a relevant education with a bachelor’s or higher degree from universities, and having been engaged in the relevant work for five years or more; or
(3) having ten or more years’ working experience in the area of expert evaluation, with more recognized professional competence.
Persons who have been punished for crimes committed intentionally or due to professional negligence, or have been dismissed from public office, or have been de-listed from the register of evaluation experts shall not be allowed to conduct expert evaluation.
5. Legal persons or other organizations applying for the conduct of expert evaluation shall satisfy the following conditions:
(1) having a definite scope of business;
(2) having the necessary instruments and equipment for the conduct of expert evaluation within the scope of business;
(3) having the testing laboratories necessary for the conduct of expert evaluation within the scope of business, established after metrical identification or laboratory assessment in accordance with relevant laws; and
(4) having three or more experts for each exercise of expert evaluation.
6. Individuals, legal persons or other organizations applying for the conduct of expert evaluation shall be subject to examination and approval by the administrative departments of justice under the people’s governments at the provincial level, which shall have those found to be qualified registered and included in the directory of evaluation experts and institutions and make the matter known to the public.
The administrative departments of justice under the people’s governments at the provincial level shall, on the basis of the increase or the cancellation of registration of evaluation experts and institutions, regularly update their directories of the evaluation experts and institutions, and publish the results.
7. The evaluation institutions established on the basis of the requirements for investigative work by investigative organs shall not be open to the general public and shall not accept any work of expert evaluation entrusted by the general public.
People’s courts and administrative departments of justice shall not set up evaluation institutions.
8. There is no relationship of administrative subordination among the evaluation institutions. In accepting entrustment with the conduct of expert evaluation, these institutions shall not be limited to particular regions.
An evaluation expert shall be engaged in expert evaluation in an evaluation institution.
9. When during legal proceedings, a dispute arises over the evaluation items stipulated by Article 2 of this Decision and expert evaluation is required, the evaluation to be made shall be entrusted to experts listed in the directory of evaluation experts. Entrustment to experts with the conduct of expert evaluation shall be accepted, in a unified manner, by the evaluation institutions where the experts belong.
Evaluation experts and institutions shall conduct expert evaluations within the scope of business as clearly stated in the directory.
Evaluation experts shall withdraw in accordance with the provisions of the relevant procedural laws.
10. The system of responsibility for expert evaluation shall be applied among evaluation experts. The experts shall independently conduct evaluation, be responsible for the opinions of the evaluations, and sign their names or affix their seals on the expert reports. Where an evaluation is made by more than one expert who have different opinions, such differences in opinion shall be clearly stated.
11. When during legal proceedings, a party raises an objection against the evaluation opinion, the experts concerned shall, upon the summons by the People’s Court according to law, appear in court as a witness.
12. When conducting expert evaluation, evaluation experts and institutions shall observe laws and regulations, observe their professional ethics and professional discipline, respect science, and follow technical procedure.
13. Where an evaluation expert or institution commits an act in violation of the provisions of this Decision, he/ it shall be given a disciplinary warning by an administrative department of justice under the people’s government at the provincial level, and be ordered to put it right.
Where under one of the following circumstances, the administrative department of justice under the people’s government at the provincial level shall suspend his/ its practice of expert evaluation for not less than three months but not more than one year as a punishment; and if the circumstances are serious, his/ its registration shall be cancelled:
(1) if serious losses are caused to the lawful rights and interests of the parties to a case due to grave dereliction of duty;
(2) if he/ it gets registered by providing falsified certificates or by other deceptive means;
(3) if upon the summons issued by the people’s court according to law, he/ it refuses to appear in court as a witness; or
(4) if there are such other circumstances as provided for by laws or administrative regulations.
Where an evaluation expert intentionally creates a false evaluation report and therefore commits a crime, his criminal responsibility shall be investigated according to law; If his act is not serious enough to constitute a crime, he shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph.
14. Administrative departments of justice shall strictly observe law in the administration of the registration system, and proactively promote the standardization and institutionalization of expert evaluation. Those persons who are held directly responsible for serious consequences due to their abuse of power or negligence of duty shall be investigated for their legal responsibility accordingly.
15. The expert evaluation items for which fees are charged and the rates shall be determined by the administrative department of justice under the State Council after consultation with the department in charge of pricing under the State Council.
16. The specific measures for registration of, and for compilation of a directory of, the evaluation experts and institutions, and for publication of the registration and the directory shall be formulated by the administrative department of justice under the State Council and submitted to the State Council for approval.
17. In this Decision, the connotations of the following terms mean:
(1) “Medico-legal identification” includes medico-legal pathological identification, medico-legal clinical identification, medico-legal psychiatric identification, medico-legal physical evidence evaluation and medico-legal poison identification.
(2) “Physical evidence evaluation” includes documentary identification, trace identification and micro-element determination.
(3) “Audio-visual material identification” includes the evaluation of the truthfulness and completeness of the sound and image information recorded in such carriers as audio tapes, videotapes, discs, light disks and pictures, the evaluation of the process of their reflections, and the categorization and identification of the recorded sound and the languages, human bodies and objects in the recorded images .
18. This Decision shall go into effect as of October 1, 2005.