【摘要】 在刑事诉讼中，针对控方提出的鉴定证据或专家证言，两大法系均可以由辩方专家审查并提出证言。但是，这种专家证言的作用力度和作用方式存在不同，由此反映辩方专家在诉讼地位上的差异性。而这种差异性是由不同法系诉讼功能及其结构所决定。在英美法系对抗式诉讼中，受制于程序公平，辩方专家是对等于控方专家的同类专家证人；而在大陆法系审问式诉讼中，受制于实体真实，辩方专家是不对等于控方鉴定人的异类专家证人。我国是一个大陆法系传统国家，辩方的专家辅助人应当定位为，不对等于鉴定人的非“意见证据”类的专家证人。更多还原

【Abstract】 In criminal proceedings of both common law and civil law systems, experts of the defense can conduct professional examination and testify to the appraisal evidence or expert testimony presented by the prosecution. However, such expert testimony has different strength and mode of action, which reflects the different litigation status of defense experts. This difference is determined by the characteristics of the litigation functions and structures of different legal systems. In the adversarial process of common law system, subject to due process, the defense expert is an expert witness equal to the prosecution expert of the same type; in the inquisitorial process of civil law system, subject to the substantive reality, the defense expert is a heterogeneous expert witness who is not equal to the prosecution forensic examiner. China is a country with civil law system, so the expert assistant on behalf of the defense should be defined as an expert witness with the non-opinion evidence,who is not equal to the forensic examiner.更多还原