摘要
水上交通事故调查报告和责任认定书可诉性之争的根源在于调查报告划分了当事人的责任,虽然修订后的《中华人民共和国海上交通安全法》仿照《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法》第73条将责任认定书确定为证据,但并没有实质性地解决争议。理想的水上交通事故调查与处理模式是与国际海事调查规则接轨,理念上应当由“责任制裁”转向“风险预防”,制度上设计独立专业的事故调查委员会进行事故调查,由其出具不含责任划分的技术性安全调查报告,具体的责任认定交由海事管理机构在行政处罚决定书中列明或者海事法院在判决书中认定或重新划分。由于当下事故责任认定书的存在,应当通过解释论的方法将其界定为因果责任,尽量减少产生的不利影响。
The source of the disputes over the justiciability of maritime traffic accident investigation report and confirmation on the liability is that the investigation report divides the parties’responsibilities.Although the amended Maritime Traffic Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China imitated Article 73 of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China and admitted that confirmation on liability can be as evidence,it does not substantively resolve the disputes.The ideal mode of investigating and handling marine traffic accidents is to be in line with international maritime investigation rules,and the philosophy should shift from“liability sanctions”to“risk prevention”.The system shall be designed for an independent professional accident investigation committee to conduct accident investigation and issue technical safety investigation report without responsibility division,and the specific liability determination shall be specified by the maritime administrative agency in the administrative penalty decision or the maritime court shall determine or re-divide in the judgment.Due to the existence of the confirmation of accident liability,it should be defined as causal liability through the method of interpretative theory so as to reduce the adverse effects.
作者
郑琳
ZHENG Lin(School of Law,Dalian Maritime University,Dalian 116026,China)
出处
《中国海商法研究》
CSSCI
2022年第1期102-112,共11页
Chinese Journal of Maritime Law
基金
2021年度中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目“海上交通事故责任认定研究”(3132021293)。
关键词
水上交通事故
事故调查委员会
安全调查
责任认定
water traffic accidents
accident investigation committee
safety investigation
responsibility identification
