关于我国残疾人福利法律制度构建之思考

构建残疾人福利法律制度是残疾人权益保障事业的重要一环,目前我国残疾人福利保障的立法体系仍未建立,现有相关法律制度对各类残疾人福利的保障有欠平等,国家责任原则未得到充分体现。今后,应科学构建残疾人福利法律制度体系,明确保障残疾人福利权理念和维护残疾人的尊严之理念,贯彻残疾人福利保障的国家责任原则。     

Analysis on the Establishment of the Welfare Legal System for Persons with Disabilities in China

构建残疾人福利法律制度是残疾人权益保障事业的重要一环,目前我国残疾人福利保障的立法体系仍未建立,现有相关法律制度对各类残疾人福利的保障有欠平等,国家责任原则未得到充分体现.今后,应科学构建残疾人福利法律制度体系,明确保障残疾人福利权理念和维护残疾人的尊严之理念,贯彻残疾人福利保障的国家责任原则.     

超越普惠与选择：我国“普惠与优待叠加”退役军人福利保障体系的理论基础

为何需要为退役军人提供福利保障以及以何种方式提供是学术界与实践界关注的重要问题。《中华人民共和国退役军人保障法》明确提出建立“普惠与优待叠加”退役军人福利保障体系,但学界尚未深入讨论我国采取此原则发展退役军人福利保障体系的制度设计依据与学理基础。论文在评述国外社会保障一般理论和退役军人福利的主要理论视角的基础上,探讨了我国退役军人福利保障体系的理论基础以及发展“普惠”加“优待”福利模式的内在逻辑。研究发现,我国退役军人具有公民身份、退役军人身份、特殊优待对象三种身份,退役军人的多元身份塑造了我国多层次的退役军人福利保障体系。在中国情境中,退役军人的福利正当性来源于退役军人与党、国家、人民之间的“双向承诺”。由于退役军人的多重身份,我国选择“普惠”加“优待”的退役军人保障模式是合理的,是符合中国国情和实际需要的制度选择,为有效保障我国退役军人合法权益奠定了法律和制度基础。     

美国法语境下公民福利权的证成及其启示

宪法上的福利权在美国宪法理论与司法实践中素有争议。受美国社会心理和文化传统的影响,早期美国社会福利政策被定位为政府公共救助政策。国家福利政策的持续性推进引起了社会文化观念的变革,奠定了福利权生成之社会基础。学术纷争与法官裁判则在客观上充当着"宪法上福利权"推动者的角色,从而促进福利政策向福利权利的转变。迈克曼等学者借助罗尔斯的正义论有力地论证了福利权的宪法正当性,并从建构宪法政治对话机制的角度阐释了"宪法福利权"的宪政功能。美国法上公民福利权演变为宪法权利的进程表明,宪法福利权的创设是历史的必然。在当今中国,这项权利同样为宪法机制的良性运行所不可或缺,我们需要采取积极措施加以应对。     

社会国的宪法意义

社会国或者福利国是近代自由资本主义发展的结果，二战之后各国竞相将其纳入宪法之中并成为现当代世界宪法发展的趋势。宪法中的社会国透过对人人享有人性尊严的生活得以保障来追求社会正义，社会国要求国家在人民的同意之下，针对全体民众而非仅仅弱势群体进行积极的作为。社会国原则是一项纲领性的宪法规范，也是一项客观宪法原则。     

一种双重面向的权利——论福利权的法律性质

尽管,福利权为美国学者所采取的主要用语,但在其他不采用该用语的国家,福利权的类似争论也在进行.其中,主要涉及到福利权是消极权利还是积极权利、福利权是道德权利抑或法律权利以及其是否需要宪法规定.而事实上,福利权可能更是一种带有混合性质的权利,在不同的面向上需要不同的保障方式.     

论我国公民财产权的宪法保护

宪法上财产权属于人权,是一项公权利,与主体的人身不可分离,是由宪法确认的,具有强制性,全体公民据此可以普遍享有对物的排他的、不可转让、不可剥夺的支配权。公民财产权保障是建立法治、保障人权的基础,财产权保障是促进经济福利和社会的效率的一个不可或缺的工具。实践中宪法对公民财产权保护制度的缺陷与不完善也是强调公民财产权宪法保护必要性的主要原因。现行宪法的第四次修改为研究这一问题提供了良好的契机,通过理论和实践、观念和制度的改革和完善,必定能在我国公民财产权的保护方面构建良好的宪法和法律保障机制。     

新时代社会政策体系建设的意义及改革的目标思路

社会政策体系建设是现代国家建设的重要内容,是现代文明的标志和产物。改革开放以来,我国的社会政策体系建设经历了复杂的转型过程,社会政策体系建设的理念逐渐清晰,与社会主义市场经济相适应的社会政策体系基本建立并日渐完善,社会政策体系的作用和效果初步显现。同时,社会政策体系也存在保障功能较弱、制度碎片化和差异化、基本公共服务体系不完善、管理能力弱、财务可持续性差等问题。建立健全社会政策体系,解决发展过程中的不平衡不充分问题,是新时代社会政策体系建设的重要任务。社会政策体系建设的基本思路,一是着力解决福利保障不充分问题,补齐民生短板;二是着力解决福利保障不平衡问题,均衡群体间的福利保障待遇水平;三是促进社会政策的体系整合,减少制度碎片化和差异化;四是提高社会政策的管理服务能力,提高运行绩效。     

论宪法私权诉讼制度在我国的建立

宪法是一个国家的根本大法,是公民基本权利的保障书,然而,由于宪法诉讼制度在我国的缺位,导致宪法在现实生活中并没有发挥公民权利的最终救济这一作用。鉴于宪法的法律性、公民权利的保障以及我国法治建设的需求,宪法私权诉讼制度亟待建立。本文论述了宪法私权诉讼制度在我国建立的必要性,并提出几点建议。     

论公民宪法基本权利的司法救济

我国目前并无宪法诉讼制度,宪法确认和保障的平等权和言论、出版、结社、宗教信仰自由等公民基本权利仍没有具体法律予以落实,公民宪法基本权利的司法救济还存在诸多障碍。在我国法制环境还很不成熟的情况下,公民宪法权利的司法救济途径可通过民事诉讼或行政诉讼救济途径保障公民宪法权利。但建立宪法诉讼制度,宪法诉讼救济保障将是最后的一道救济防线,这也是我国实现宪政的必由之路。     

Breaking The Cycle Of Intergenerational Child Maltreatment: A Case For Active Efforts For Dependent Minor Parents And Their Children In State Custody

Dependent minor parents placed in foster care with their children often face significant hurdles. These parents are responsible to make caregiving decisions for their children, while they themselves fall under the caregiving responsibility of the state child welfare system. As such, dependent minor parents live in a “twilight zone” – they hold full parental rights, but limited rights as teenagers. For a number of reasons, the children of minor parents in foster care often come into state custody. When two generations are in foster care at the same time, states must balance the safety and best interests of the children with the rights of minor parents to care for their own children. Currently, the state child welfare system is only required to provide “reasonable efforts” to reunify parents with children when they have been removed from their care for abuse, neglect, or dependency. However, dependent minor parents in state custody often require more supportive services in order to successfully reunify with their children than in a typical child welfare case. This article places the circumstance just described in the context of dependent minor parents’ constitutionally protected rights, and advocates for a higher standard which would require states to provide “active efforts” to protect and preserve these young families.     

Beyond the property debate: animal welfare as a public good

Abstract

Animal protection is socially constructed through laws specifying which animals should be protected and how. Most jurisdictions codify animal abuse by specifying the legal protections granted to animals. While these vary between jurisdictions, western legal systems generally provide for better levels of animal protection by incorporating animal welfare and wildlife crime laws into criminal justice systems. UK legislation has long held that animal welfare is a public good, thus animals should be protected in the public interest. However, despite the protective provisions of animal protection laws they generally fall short of giving animals actual rights, protection exists only to the extent that animal and human interests coincide. Animals’ legal status as property dictates that much anti-animal abuse and wildlife crime legislation is about allowing animal exploitation commensurate with human interests. However, UK legislation in the form of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 subtly shifts this position in respect of domestic animals by imposing a duty of care towards companion animals. This paper argues that by requiring owners and responsible persons to give active consideration to the needs of individual companion animals, the Animal Welfare Act provides animals with a level of protection that amounts to a form of legal rights.     

Reflecting on Brexit: migration myths and what comes next for EU migrants in the UK?

This article considers the potential impact of Brexit on the family and welfare entitlement of EU migrants living in the UK and of UK migrants living in other EU Member States. Whilst the vast majority of those campaigning for the UK to leave the EU (publicly at least) argued in favour of those already present in the UK at the time of the referendum having their status protected, the government has been considerably less vocal in its support for this outcome. As such, EU migrants living in the UK presently face considerable uncertainty as to their own and their families’ future legal status and entitlement to welfare rights. The article will expose some of the evidential and legal gaps in the assertions made about EU migrants’ socio economic entitlement with a view to providing a more informed, legally accurate appraisal of how the Brexit negotiations could unfold.     

反不正当竞争法“权利”与“利益”双重客体保护新论

"权利一元保护"与"利益一元保护"是学界对反不正当竞争法(反法)保护客体的一般概括,且建基于反法"利益一元保护"通说之上的知识产权法往往具有适用上的优先性。但是,从反法的历史血统、利益与权利的转化程式以及现行反法的规范实践来看,利益与权利双重保护更符合反法的客观实际:在历史演化层面,反法虽从民法中分离,但本质上却承继了传统民法中权利与利益双重保护的血统;在转化程式上,反法伴随着"利益—法益—应然权利—法定权利"的转化路径而形成一种"随动关系",既为这一"过程利益"提供保护,又将作为"转化节点"的具体"法益"和"权利"以实定法的方式确立下来;在规范实践方面,作为法益保护的经营者利益以及社会公共利益、作为应然权利的商誉权、作为从应然权利向法定权利成功转型的商业秘密权,以及作为法定权利的消费者知情权等客体均得到了反法的实际承认。在双重客体保护论的基础上,反法中的诸多疑难问题均可获得进一步释明。     

福利行政调查权与受益人权利保障

作为一种特殊类型的行政调查形式,福利调查在福利领域发挥着重要的作用。通过多种形式的福利调查,公民得以享有一定的福利权益。但在福利调查的过程中,往往可能对公民的隐私等权益造成一定的侵犯。因此,行政机关在获得信息的同时,如何保障公民的权益,这无疑是未来行政调查研究的方向之一。     

竞争法体系下商标立法模式探讨

从宏观视阈看,商标法属于竞争法的体系范畴,与反不正当竞争法一样都体现了政府对微观经济的干预。法律保护民事主体的合法民事权益,商标权益在内容上涵盖商标专用权与商标利益,从维护我国注册制的权威以及有利于制度的可操作性而言,对于权利和利益在法律保护的路径上应有所区别。将商标权益区分为商标专用权与商标利益分别由《商标法》和《反不正当竞争法》保护,使《商标法》作为民法的特别法,与其他民事法律,包括《民法通则》、《侵权责任法》等形成较强的逻辑自洽性,同时,也使商标法作为反不正当竞争法的特别法,与反不正当竞争法在制止利用商标而进行的不正当竞争方面彼此分工,有效协调。     

维护个人的尊严与日本障碍者福利法制

二战后,日本残疾人即障碍者福利法制在生存权理念的指引下得以建立与发展。进入21世纪,日本障碍者福利法制在强调生存权理念之同时,更加注重维护个人的尊严理念,并将这一理念贯彻于障碍者福利法制的内容之中,日本障碍者福利法制出现了社会权与自由权相统一的倾向。     

论中国农地产权制度市场化改革的思想障碍

我国现行的农地产权制度安排是城乡两大利益集团博弈的直接结果.由于农民政治权力弱小又缺乏土地权益的法律保障,以任何借口阻挠农地产权市场化改革,都是为了维护城市既得利益集团的需要.目前,除了政府不肯轻易放弃廉价占用农民土地的经济利益之外,这一制度安排还得到了理论界一些权威人士的舆论支持.这些理论观点主要包括:应消灭一切土地私有制,土地集中兼并将导致农民两极分化、不利于兼顾土地的公平与效率、确保农民的基本生活保障与国家粮食安全,农地私有化将提高国家基础设施建设成本等等.因此,澄清理论界对于下一步深化农地产权制度市场化改革理论上的认识误区,具有重大的理论与实践意义.     

Women's Rights to Equality and Non-discrimination: Discriminatory Family Legislation in Uganda and the Role of Uganda's Constitutional Court

In 1995 Uganda adopted the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda1995 which protected a wide range of human rights includingwomen's rights to equality and freedom from discrimination.Article 33(6) of the Constitution prohibited ‘laws, customsor traditions which are against the dignity, welfare or interestof women’. However, more than ten years later legislation,customary laws and practices have continued to be in force largelydue to the lack of political will to confront issues of inequalityand discrimination in a holistic and comprehensive manner. Thisarticle examines such discriminatory laws against women andthe jurisprudence of Uganda's Constitutional Court in the areasof divorce, criminalization of adultery, succession and marriagelaws. Using a comparative approach, it observes that these lawsconflict with Uganda's Constitution as well as regional andinternational human rights treaties to which Uganda is a Stateparty. It recommends that discriminatory laws should be harmonizedwith principles of equality and non-discrimination, and advocatesfor a litigation strategy.