Recently, the Supreme People's Court and the Ministry of Justice jointly issued the "Opinions on Establishing a Mechanism for Coordinating the Management and Use of Forensic Expertise" (hereinafter referred to as the "Opinions"), which require people's courts at all levels and judicial administrative authorities at all levels, in accordance with the "Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Issues Relating to the Administration of Forensic Expertise" (hereinafter referred to as the "Decision"), to further standardize forensic expertise work, fully leverage the role of forensic expertise, and enhance the quality of forensic expertise.

　　The "Opinions" require that judicial administrative authorities strictly perform their registration and management functions, effectively strengthen the management of forensic examinations—including forensic pathology, physical evidence, audio-visual materials, and environmental damage assessments—and rigorously enforce admission standards for forensic institutions and forensic experts. They also call for enhanced management of forensic expertise and quality, standardization of forensic practices, intensified supervision of professional conduct, and promotion of the lawful and orderly conduct of forensic examination work. People's courts are required to standardize the commissioning of forensic examinations, improve procedures for transferring examination materials, standardize the review of technical evidence, regulate courtroom cross-examination procedures, provide guidance and support for forensic experts appearing in court to testify, and strengthen their capacity to examine and evaluate forensic opinions, thereby ensuring judicial fairness. Both people's courts and judicial administrative authorities should establish regular mechanisms for communication, coordination, and information exchange, collaboratively addressing prominent practical issues such as the commissioning and acceptance of forensic examinations and the appearance of forensic experts in court, and continuously refine and improve relevant systems.

　　The entrustment and acceptance processes are critical stages in forensic examination. According to the "Opinions," judicial administrative authorities must strictly standardize the procedures and conditions for accepting forensic examinations, scientifically and reasonably compile lists of forensic institutions and forensic experts in accordance with the law, and provide people's courts with multiple channels for obtaining information and retrieval services. Forensic institutions may not refuse to accept examination entrustments without justifiable reasons, nor may they privately accept examination materials submitted by parties without prior confirmation by the people's court. They must standardize the receipt and preservation of examination materials. If it is necessary to obtain or supplement examination materials, the forensic institution or the party involved shall submit a request to the court that issued the entrustment. People's courts must strengthen their review of the necessity and feasibility of examination matters entrusted to them, especially those involving re-examination, and carefully select forensic institutions and experts that best meet the requirements of the case proceedings.

　　The “Opinions” also set forth provisions regarding the performance of expert witnesses’ duty to appear in court and testify. They emphasize that people’s courts should refine the procedures for reviewing, initiating, and notifying expert witnesses’ court appearances, and resolve disputes over expert opinions through strengthened courtroom cross-examination. Arrangements such as seating and designated pathways should be provided for expert witnesses appearing in court. , In accordance with the law, the personal safety and other legitimate rights and interests of expert witnesses shall be safeguarded. Criminal courts may equip themselves with simultaneous video testimony rooms and adopt protective measures that do not reveal the expert witness’s appearance or true voice. Transportation expenses, accommodation expenses, living expenses, and compensation for lost work time incurred by expert witnesses—where such expenses are required by national regulations to be borne by the parties—shall be collected on their behalf by the people’s court. Judicial administrative authorities shall supervise and guide expert witnesses in fulfilling their legal obligation to appear in court and testify; those who refuse to appear in court without justifiable reasons shall be strictly dealt with in accordance with the law.

　　The "Opinions" clearly state that judicial administrative authorities should strengthen supervision over forensic appraisals, refine penalty regulations, and promote standardized practice among appraisers and appraisal institutions. Supervisory information shall be made publicly available to the public. If appraisers or appraisal institutions disagree with a penalty decision, they may, in accordance with the law, apply for administrative reconsideration or file an administrative lawsuit. When the People's Courts discover that an appraisal institution or appraiser has engaged in illegal or non-compliant practices—such as improperly accepting cases or refusing to appear in court to testify—they may suspend their engagement in forensic appraisal services provided by the People's Courts and notify the judicial administrative authorities or issue a judicial recommendation. The judicial administrative authorities must promptly investigate and handle such cases according to regulations and provide feedback on the outcomes to the People's Courts. If an appraiser or appraisal institution is legally found to have committed serious violations, such as deliberately providing false appraisals, the judicial administration department of the provincial-level people's government shall impose a penalty of suspending its forensic appraisal activities for a period ranging from three months to one year; in particularly serious cases, its registration shall be revoked; and if the conduct constitutes a crime, criminal liability shall be pursued in accordance with the law. The People's Courts may, depending on the circumstances, choose not to entrust such entities with forensic appraisal services in the future. In the course of their professional activities, if an appraiser or appraisal institution causes losses to a party due to intentional misconduct or gross negligence, it shall bear civil liability in accordance with the law. (Reporter Luo Shuzhen)