Experts from Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise at the round table have discussed with their colleagues an important topic: “A review of the conclusions of forensic examinations and expert studies by third parties on request of the process participants: issues and solutions”.
Among the participants of the meeting are specialists from Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the State Forensic Research Centre of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Scientific and Research Institute of Intellectual Property of the National Academy of Law Sciences of Ukraine, the Centre for Forensic Expertise and Expert Studies of the State Information of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine of the State Forensic Administration of Ukraine and others.
The subject of the event was chosen not accidentally, because its relevance is conditioned by the realities of the current events, in particular, by the mass use in the proceedings of reviews of the conclusions of forensic examinations and expert studies that individuals are not commissioned by the forensic experts. At the same time, their legal status, as well as peer review activities, is not regulated at the legislative level. However, the demand for so-called independent reviews or advisory opinions is increasing.
In the opinion of experienced specialists which was expressed during the round table discussion, such a situation is explained by the interest of the participants of the process in refuting the conclusions of the forensic expert and discrediting him with the aim of re-examination.
During an active discussion of the reported problem, representatives of various departments came to the unanimous conclusion that it is inadmissible to add to the case files or to conduct such reviews.
An important summary of the round table should be considered the constructive work of delegates who outlined a number of measures aimed at countering the peer review of third-party conclusions of forensic examinations and expert studies, as well as neutralizing the negative impact of such reviewers on the further course of a trial or proceedings.