日批在线视频_内射毛片内射国产夫妻_亚洲三级小视频_在线观看亚洲大片短视频_女性向h片资源在线观看_亚洲最大网

USEUROPEAFRICAASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
Opinion
Home / Opinion / Opinion Line

Clear charging standards for judicial expertise required

China Daily | Updated: 2017-02-10 07:59

A LAWYER FROM CHENGDU in Southwest China's Sichuan province has revealed on his micro blog that the cost of the judicial expertise for a case, which involved checking a signature, a fingerprint and two stamps, was 170,000 yuan ($24,767). The judicial expertise agency responded that it followed a national charging regulation. However, that regulation was abolished last May. Lao Yue, a retired prosecutor, commented on Beijing News:

When the incident was reported by media outlets, the judicial expertise agency said that there is no new regulation yet so it followed the old one. This is a poor defense because as soon as a regulation is abolished, it is no longer law and cannot be quoted as legal support for any actions.

Actually, ever since it was jointly issued by the National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Justice in 2009, the old regulation has been blamed for setting too high charging standards. According to the regulation, the price of judicial expertise was set as a certain percentage of the claim; but many argued that the cost of judicial expertise has nothing to do with how much money is involved in a judicial case. The judicial experts spend the same time and energy identifying each signature and fingerprint, no matter how big a deal it involves.

That's why the National Development and Reform Commission, the top economic planner, abolished the regulation. It also made it clear that before a new regulation comes into effect, the charging of judicial expertise should be co-decided by government price departments and judicial administrative departments at the provincial level. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the judicial expertise agency in the case is wrong and it should not have charged as it did.

Lack of proper charging standards is only one of the chaotic situations in the judicial expertise sector. In order to ensure their independence, the law requires judicial expertise agencies to be third-party agencies affiliated to no judicial agency, but some agencies run like commercial companies. Some of them overcharge, while some of them abuse the power by giving false results in certain cases after taking bribes.

To ensure justice, it is time that judicial departments at various levels better regulated these judicial expertise agencies.

Most Viewed in 24 Hours
Copyright 1995 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

Registration Number: 130349
FOLLOW US
主站蜘蛛池模板: 日本在线一区二区 | 丁香伊人网 | 国产精品1区2区3区4区 | 亚洲天堂区 | 成人高清免费 | 国产精品中文字幕在线 | 一二三四国产精品 | 黄色大片a级 | 青青草国产精品 | 亚洲国产视频网站 | 又色又爽视频 | 精品国产18久久久久久 | 日女人网站 | 黄色成年人网站 | 国产精品欧美激情 | 四虎影院在线视频 | 中文字幕久久久 | 一级黄色淫片 | 国产午夜精品久久久久久久 | 日韩av高清| 日韩国产精品毛片 | 亚洲欧美视频在线播放 | 国产精品自产拍高潮在线观看 | 毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片 | 免费黄视频在线观看 | 第一页在线| 日本高清黄色 | av播播| 蜜桃色av| 毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片 | 在线天堂在线 | 国产性―交―乱―色―情人 | www 在线观看视频 | 黄色av网站在线观看 | 日韩第四页 | 日本久久综合 | 欧美区在线 | 九九视频网| 亚洲天堂自拍偷拍 | 奇米超碰在线 | 美女毛片视频 |