THE QUERY PROJECT - European Commission - Europa
THE QUERY PROJECT - European Commission - Europa
THE QUERY PROJECT - European Commission - Europa
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
FR Favorize co-optation (Nomination through relationships), no<br />
real technical choice. Judges are overwhelmed with law cases<br />
and do not have time to review properly technical nomination<br />
details. No national view, only regional decisions.<br />
CY Even though the Engineering Chamber of Cyprus assigns<br />
experts and arbitrators in various fields including reconstruction,<br />
this does not mean that a person with little or no<br />
qualifications cannot be accepted in court as an expert. The<br />
judges in our legal system listen to the various testimonies<br />
and make their own evaluations. Usually in their decisions<br />
[they] make comments on the expert statements.<br />
very dissatisfied ------------------------<br />
PL Certification according ISO norm, as certification of personnel<br />
is not a good way to recognise knowledge and experience.<br />
It is impossible to determine ability and intelligence which<br />
is necessary to experts’ work.<br />
NL For criminal law, [certification] for the police is provided by<br />
law, which is good. For civil law, a method of certification/<br />
membership of an expert bulletin board is still being worked<br />
on.<br />
HU It would be necessary to liberalise the certification process.<br />
LV The certification method falls short on several points, is<br />
incomplete. Court is unable to pay for further training of<br />
accident analysts.<br />
GR There is no certification or other accrediation for accident<br />
analysts. So far, there is no examination of an analyst’s expertise.<br />
FI There is no certification nor education and training.<br />
SE There is none [no certification].<br />
Question 61, answer: ‘other’ – details on other certification<br />
system preferred<br />
PL Random comparison between report and the records available,<br />
or competency tests.<br />
CH [Certification] through the federation of the particular professional<br />
group, and a state body.<br />
CY Certification through a <strong>European</strong> Institution.<br />
HU E.g. IQ certificate / Bonn.<br />
Responses to question 71: Comments on ISO accreditation<br />
LV ISO is not suitable for reconstructionists. A form of quality<br />
evaluation needs to be introduced! I have drawn up [such an<br />
evaluation] which I will be introducing at the EFA congress in<br />
Greece (www.efacongress.com).<br />
PL Accreditation at ISO isn’t a good idea. It is impossible to<br />
check the ability of experts to prepare good expertises. Also<br />
if certification exists, it is crazy to have it renewed after such<br />
short period as 3 years. For old experts it should be lifetime<br />
or 10 years.<br />
SI We don’t have an ISO accreditation of accident reconstructionists.<br />
CY There is no experience in Cyprus on ISO accreditation but if<br />
such accreditation would improve the quality of work of the<br />
reconstructionist, I believe it is something to evaluate seriously.<br />
HU There is no ISO accreditation in Hungary, only as of 5 years<br />
ago the IQ-Cert, formerly DVR-Cert.<br />
AT At the moment, the ISO certification is irrelevant.<br />
R E S u lt S o f t h E Q u E S t I o n n A I R E<br />
Question 94, answer ‘other’, occasions in which the expert is<br />
regularly called to an accident scence<br />
LV expert decides whether to attend the scene<br />
IT very rarely the case<br />
ES only for research projects<br />
PL important persons<br />
FR Extremely severe accidents<br />
CH regional differences / accidents through speeding<br />
Question 95, answer ‘other’: more than one option for<br />
the hiring of an expert in a penal case<br />
FR Judge in charge<br />
ES a, b, c<br />
PT a, b and c<br />
CH a, b, c<br />
NO a, c<br />
IT a, c<br />
SK The expert can also be called to court by one of the parties<br />
[= a,c]<br />
GR a, but b is also possible<br />
CZ Police<br />
NL The police carry out the primary work; a lawyer can consult<br />
the advice of a private expert<br />
Question 98, answer ‘yes, in the following situations can<br />
findings in a private expert’s report be kept confidential’<br />
IT Things that are not favourable to the party<br />
PT During police investigations<br />
NL He always may, but with the risk of not being believed again<br />
in the future<br />
CH Solely has to answer questions<br />
LU Ethically not justifiable!!<br />
Question 101, Answer ‘other’ on requirement of oath in a<br />
penal case<br />
IT Only the court expert.<br />
CH No oath, a false report can be punished with a fine or up to<br />
five years in prison.<br />
Responses to question 112: Reasons for the preference of the<br />
availability of both joint and private expert systems<br />
DE For a severe accident, two experts are better, while for all<br />
minor accidents, one expert should suffice.<br />
NO Different solutions in different types of cases.<br />
FR Providing 2 insights is intellectually beneficial however choice<br />
should always be left to litigants.<br />
PT Freedom of choosing the best way of defence - expert is<br />
impartial<br />
LU Were there only competent and unbiased expert, one joint<br />
expert would be preferable. This should be aimed at but is<br />
sadly not the case. Therefore, the parties should at least have<br />
the possibility to defend themselves.<br />
BE The public prosecutor has an expert. Each party has an expert<br />
and sometimes the judge calls another expert. No matter<br />
who’s asking you to work: you give an expert opinion.<br />
GB [not for the availability of both systems] It must be understood<br />
that the experts on each side must give their true<br />
unbiased opinions. They must not act simply to support their<br />
client’s case. Generally this works, but there are a few notori-
Change language