The main litigation value of expert opinion lies in the objective legal advice it provides, not in the expert himself. From a practical point of view, those who participate in the demonstration are generally the best in academic circles. According to the articles of association of China-France Network Expert Demonstration Service Company, "experts refer to professors, associate professors and doctors in legal theory and practice." Because legal experts are well-known in the legal field, many judges may be their students, or have listened to their lectures and read their books. Objective pressure and psychological suggestion may be unfavorable to the exercise of its independent judicial power. In order to avoid the preconceived influence of experts' prestige, status and knowledge on the judges who undertake the case, the parties should submit the experts who participated in the argument anonymously to the court only on the argument itself, or only indicate the name of the organization that organized the argument, so as to show its authority within a reasonable limit.
(two) the effectiveness of expert argumentation activities should affect its acceptability.
It is common sense for experts to charge for demonstration activities, and market demand is inevitable. It is understandable that the experts entrusted by the parties give expert advice from their own point of view, but their remuneration should be limited to a reasonable range. In the amicus curiae system in the United States, it is stipulated that the opinions submitted should include the financial support records provided by the parties or other members. The reason is that experts are essentially different from the defense lawyers of one party, and their opinions should be objective. Excessive remuneration may affect them. Therefore, the judge should judge the objectivity of the opinion according to the remuneration received by the experts, and then decide whether to adopt it. The author believes that the expenses paid by the parties for the demonstration should be listed after the demonstration, which is roughly equivalent to the remuneration paid by scholars and experts for participating in ordinary academic discussions.
(3) Exclude the part of the opinion book that judges the facts.
Judging from the contents covered by expert opinions in judicial practice, there are both opinions on the facts of the case and opinions on the application of the law. For example, of the 2 1 legal opinions collected from the Policy Research Office of the Higher People's Court of Zhejiang Province, only 3 gave expert opinions on the legal issues reflected in a case, and the remaining 18 involved the evaluation of facts. In my opinion, expert opinions can only explain the legal application of the case, but can't express opinions on how to determine the facts. This is determined by the special status of experts and scholars, because they are neither the parties nor the investigators of the case, so they have no right to express their opinions on the facts of the case, and making legal judgments on the facts can only be the functions and powers of judges. However, if experts' opinions are absorbed in the defense words, we can not only apply the law, but also express our opinions on the fact finding, because it has become an organic part of the defense words, which is determined by the role of the defense words in litigation.