Clear responsibilities and authorities in forensic appraisal by case

This morning, November 5, giving comments on the draft Law on Judicial Expertise (amended), the National Assembly Deputies Group 6 (including the National Assembly Delegations of Dong Nai, Lang Son and Hue City) commented that the amendment of the Law this time is of special importance in order to overcome shortcomings in litigation activities. However, to meet practical requirements, the draft Law needs to focus on thoroughly resolving key issues, clarifying legal responsibilities, improving professionalism and avoiding resource overlap.

Scene of the discussion session at Group 6. Photo: Ho Long

Case-by-case appraisal must clearly identify the performer and responsible agency.

Commenting on the draft Law on Judicial Expertise (amended), National Assembly deputies commented that this amendment to the Law is of special importance in litigation activities, especially in overcoming the shortcomings that have been summarized and directed by the Central Steering Committee on preventing and combating corruption, waste and negativity. However, it is necessary to clearly define the scope of the amendment to thoroughly resolve key issues.

According to National Assembly Deputy Nguyen Cong Long ( Dong Nai ), the biggest problem at present lies in case-by-case appraisal (related to the fields of finance, banking, environment...), which are fields that do not have specialized public appraisal organizations.

The draft Law still maintains the provision of requesting appraisal from Ministries, ministerial-level agencies, and specialized agencies under provincial People's Committees. Delegates asked: if the Ministries are requested, who will be the entity conducting the appraisal and responsible? If the specialized unit stamps, the legality and responsibility of the results will be reduced.

National Assembly Deputy Nguyen Cong Long (Dong Nai) speaks. Photo: Ho Long

Based on the above reality, the delegate suggested that the draft Law should clearly stipulate: The responsible entity and the final seal must be the Ministry or the agency being consulted, in order to clearly define the legal status and enhance accountability. "If this issue is not resolved, the draft Law has not really met the basic requirements for the case-by-case appraisal system" - the delegate emphasized.

Also according to delegate Nguyen Cong Long, the draft Law's proposal to expand the authority of the Criminal Technical Department (PKTHS) and the Provincial Police to include injury assessment (in addition to the current autopsy) will create a situation where two units are performing the same issue. Accordingly, the delegate suggested that the Drafting Committee should study and supplement regulations on a clear coordination mechanism, distinguishing which cases require police forensic examination and which cases require medical forensic examination, in order to mobilize the maximum number of medical experts and ensure objectivity (for example, complicated cases or cases caused by officers and soldiers should be given priority for medical forensic examination).

Agreeing with the above opinion, National Assembly Deputy Pham Nhu Hiep ( Hue City) affirmed: the important goal of the draft Law on Judicial Expertise (amended) is to contribute to resolving cases promptly, objectively, and in accordance with the law; improve the quality of litigation activities; improve the capacity of the team of appraisers, appraisal organizations and the effectiveness of performing judicial expertise, in parallel with strengthening the effectiveness of state management and the responsibility of the agencies conducting litigation in this field.

National Assembly Deputy Pham Nhu Hiep (Hue City) speaks. Photo: Ho Long

However, the delegate said that in order to perfect the legal mechanism, the Drafting Committee needs to continue reviewing and adding some regulations to increase resources and expand the appraisal organization system, in which there should be special regulations on conditions and mechanisms to protect appraisers performing forensic psychiatric appraisal work.

The delegate emphasized that the current work of forensic psychiatric assessment is very stressful and has high risks, but finding, training or retaining staff and doctors to do this work is very difficult. Without preferential policies and regulatory barriers to protect them, this team will find it difficult to undertake the work.

Review of state management authority on judicial appraisal

Acknowledging the viewpoint of drafting the Law on Judicial Expertise (amended) to institutionalize the Party's policies and guidelines on administrative procedure reform, application of science and technology, and digital transformation in judicial expertise activities, National Assembly Deputy Pham Trong Nghia (Lang Son) suggested that the Drafting Committee should review a number of regulations on organization.

Specifically, regarding State management responsibility in judicial expertise activities, in Clause 4, Point b, Article 7 of the Draft Law stipulates that the Supreme People's Procuracy (SPP) has the authority to "Establish, reorganize, and dissolve the Criminal Technical Expertise Department under the Supreme People's Procuracy". However, according to Clause 3, Article 63 of the Law on Organization of the People's Procuracy, the regulation of the working apparatus of the SPP is under the approval authority of the National Assembly Standing Committee. Therefore, the delegate suggested that the name of the Criminal Technical Expertise Department under the Supreme People's Procuracy should not be specifically mentioned in Article 7 to ensure compliance with the correct authority.

National Assembly Deputy Pham Trong Nghia (Lang Son) speaks. Photo: Ho Long

Regarding the appointment and dismissal of forensic experts (Article 11), the regulation on transferring the authority of appointment to the head of the management agency (Minister, Head of ministerial-level agency, Chief of the Supreme People's Procuracy), the delegate said that such a regulation is not clear, especially in the case of a forensic technical expert working at the Ministry of National Defense or the Supreme People's Procuracy, who has the authority to appoint? Furthermore, the three reasons given by the Government for the transfer of authority need to be supplemented with more convincing grounds. Therefore, the delegate suggested that the Drafting Agency consider and retain the authority to appoint forensic experts as in the current Law (the Law clearly stipulates that the Minister of Health appoints forensic experts, the Minister of Public Security appoints forensic technical experts), in order to ensure specialization and unified management by field.

Regarding the standards for case-based forensic experts, Clause 1, Article 13 requires that the forensic expert must be a "Vietnamese citizen permanently residing in Vietnam". Although Vietnam has reserved forensic expertise services in the CPTPP, in order to meet the requirements for improving quality, especially in cases with foreign elements, and in the context of the forensic team lacking legal knowledge and professional skills, the delegate suggested that the Drafting Committee refer to international experience to consider expanding in some cases to allow foreign citizens with good personal backgrounds to participate in forensic expertise as case-based forensic experts.

Regarding the Office of Judicial Expertise (Article 20), delegates agreed with the provisions of the draft Law on expanding the scope of the field of socialized judicial expertise (adding the following specialties: DNA, documents, digital and electronic, fingerprints, resources) when allowing the Office of Judicial Expertise to operate in the form of private enterprises and partnerships. This is to institutionalize the Party's policy in Resolution No. 27-NQ/TW on mobilizing public resources and socializing the field of judicial expertise.

Source: https://daibieunhandan.vn/ro-trach-nhiem-tham-quyen-trong-giam-dinh-tu-phap-theo-vu-viec-10394449.html