JOURNAL OF BEIJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND A ›› 2020, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (2): 143-153.DOI: 10.13766/j.bhsk.1008-2204.2018.0297

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Crisis and Countermeasures of Marketization of Judicial Identification in China

WANG Yuanyuan1, XING Zhe2   

  1. 1. School of Law, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing 100083, China;
    2. Institute of Evidence Law and Forensic Science, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing 100088, China
  • Received:2018-10-17 Online:2020-03-25 Published:2020-04-01


Due to the value conflict between the neutral status of appraisal institutions and the beneficial oriented market, the marketization of the judicial identification's reform appears to be quite challenging. Meanwhile, the gaps in relevant legislation and the lack of supervision have all made money the priority of all, giving some accreditation bodies an opportunity to take advantage. Judical expertise institutions are profit-oriented, and make use of their own positions, in order to conduct unfair career paths, thus undermining the neutrality that the judicial appraisal institutions should maintain, and further seriously destroying the credibility of the judiciary. However, many scholars cannot get out of the knowledge of law for their research, resulting in the limited research ideas and perspectives. The reform of judicial identification is not only simply about the specification of the judicial identification itself, but also to establish a healthy market environment, as it is the basis for the sound development of the judicial identification industry. In terms of the market regulations, it is urgent for the judicial appraisal industry to integrate resources on the basis of demarcation of marketization and commercialization, and adjust the entry barriers and exit mechanism. Moreover, it is necessary to establish quality rating in the way of judicial appraisal classification management. In the aspect of legal regulation, the perfection of the judicial expertise evidence system is conducive to strengthen the connection between the judicial system and the appraisal system and reduce the asymmetric information transmission. The balance between the neutrality of judicial appraisal and marketization is more dependent on the enhancement of legislative supply, the enactment of the judicial appraisal law and the improvement of the regulatory system including the regulatory subject, mode, authority and responsibility.

Key words: judicial identification, marketization, PEST theory, market regulation, legal regulation

CLC Number: