Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2005 Oct-Dec;55(4):268-72.

[Remarks about the position of the medico-legal expert in imperative regulations in the Penal and Civil Codes]

[Article in Polish]
Affiliations
  • PMID: 16498966
Review

[Remarks about the position of the medico-legal expert in imperative regulations in the Penal and Civil Codes]

[Article in Polish]
Czesław Chowaniec et al. Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol. 2005 Oct-Dec.

Abstract

In the monograph 'Medico-legal opinions--essays on theory', prof. K. Jaegermann wrote that 'the use of an expert requires theoretical or fairly clear knowledge about the mutual relationship between judge and expert'. In his opinion knowledge of this kind plays a significant role in estimating the usefulness of so-called expert evidence. Practical knowledge about the relationship between the judge and expert is necessary but not a decisive condition not only for a lawyer to be a judge but also for a physician to be a medico-legal expert. An expert can be not only a person appointed by the court but must also possess proper knowledge in a particular field, namely, the required professional and specialist qualifications and must also considered to be impartial. On the basis of the analysis of law in force and imperative regulations in Penal and Civil Codes, the authors have presented remarks relating to the expert's status as well as the lack of judicial control over the activity of experts appointed by court. Verification of professional qualifications in court experts and a reduction of those appointed 'ad hoc' are suggested. In the authors opinion co-operation between lawyers and experts should be improved. It is also essential to introduce statutory legal protection of court experts as well as to undertake activities leading to equaling the status of Polish court experts to that of other European countries.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

MeSH terms