| Project/Area Number |
23730060
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Research Field |
Criminal law
|
|---|
| Research Institution | The University of Tokyo |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
NARUSE Go 東京大学, 法学(政治学)研究科(研究院), 准教授 (90466730)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2011 – 2013
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2013)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,730,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,100,000、Indirect Cost: ¥630,000)
Fiscal Year 2013: ¥910,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000、Indirect Cost: ¥210,000)
Fiscal Year 2012: ¥780,000 (Direct Cost: ¥600,000、Indirect Cost: ¥180,000)
Fiscal Year 2011: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | 科学的証拠 / 証拠の許容性 / 裁判員制度 / 証拠の関連性 / DNA型鑑定 / 刑事証拠法 |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
The goal of this research project is to elucidate the theoretical basis of admissibility of scientific evidence and propose the concrete standard for it. For this goal, I examined the various kinds of admissibility standard for scientific evidence in the common law countries (U.S., England, Australia, and Canada) and the civil law country (Germany).
As a conclusion, I support the position of U.S. and England, and insist that there should be a reliability-based admissibility test in Japanese criminal proceeding. This admissibility test should cover not only scientific evidence, but also non-scientific expert evidence. This is because a trier of fact doesn't have enough knowledge to assess the reliability of expert evidence which is often technical and complex. However, I assert that such test can be included under the concept of relevancy, just like the position of Canada. This is because the concept of relevancy in Japan is more comprehensive than that in U.S. and England.
|
