涉法涉诉信访机构不作为及其监督

涉法涉诉信访是一种极具中国特色的纠纷解决机制,是信访制度中的一种,既具有权利救济等重要功能,也存在一些弊端。近年来,涉法涉诉信访问题是困扰国家机关的老大难问题,申诉案件多,涉法涉诉信访问题突出,涉法涉诉信访机构面临沉重的信访工作压力与负担,由此造成的涉法涉诉信访机构不作为的现象也日益突出。本文主要通过对涉法涉诉信访机构不作为的界定以及不作为的现状及危害,并提出了对这种不作为行为进行监督的制度构想,以期完善涉法涉诉信访工作。     

涉诉信访的权利救济功能与公民信访权利定型

涉诉信访在当前的＂勃兴＂有着深刻的制度背景与功能支撑,但涉诉信访的权利救济功能与现代司法制度之间存在一种特殊关系,这种特殊关系导致涉诉信访的实践陷入困境,并影响其存在的正当性与合理性。因此,应以司法主体性理念为基础,通过将公民信访权进行法律定型,围绕公民信访权重建涉诉信访制度。     

信访新政呼唤立法支持

随着中共中央办公厅和国务院办公厅日前出台《关于依法处理涉法涉诉问题的意见》,我国开始实行诉讼与信访分离制度,建立涉法涉诉信访事项导入司法程序机制,涉及民商事、行政、刑事等诉讼权利救济的信访事项从普通信访体制中分离出来,由政法机关依法处理.那么,非涉法涉诉的普通信访如何处理？能否通过加快立法,完善信访制度,更好地畅通群众诉求的表达渠道？     

信访新政呼唤立法支持

随着中共中央办公厅和国务院办公厅日前出台《关于依法处理涉法涉诉问题的意见》,我国开始实行诉讼与信访分离制度,建立涉法涉诉信访事项导入司法程序机制,涉及民商事、行政、刑事等诉讼权利救济的信访事项从普通信访体制中分离出来,由政法机关依法处理.那么,非涉法涉诉的普通信访如何处理？能否通过加快立法,完善信访制度,更好地畅通群众诉求的表达渠道？对此,记者进行了深入采访.     

司法解决涉诉信访纠纷的机制构建

涉诉信访是与具体诉讼案件有着某种联系的信访形式,可分为司法涉诉信访、司法外涉诉信访和假想涉诉信访三类,其成因可以从不同视角得出不同结论.司法解决涉诉信访纠纷应构建符合当下法治状况的解决机制,具体包括法官职业化保障机制,三审终审机制,司法终结机制;司法依据完善机制,司法与行政良性互动机制,综合治理机制,推进完政治理机制;听证消弭机制,博弈分析机制和救济适当机制.     

涉法涉诉信访之案件成因、制度困局与破解之道

外在的制度性诱因和内在的观念性诱因促成了当下持续攀升的涉法涉诉信访案件。此类信访不仅打破了司法救济的最终性,人治色彩浓厚,而且因处访机构众多、效率低下、处访程序失范、救济成本高昂等屡遭诟病。但在司法公信力低下、权利救济机制尚不健全的今天,相比终止信访的救济功能而言,结合我国实际情况,有针对性地改善现有信访制度,使其适应我国转型期的特殊需要,似乎来得更为妥当。     

信访的权利救济功能与制度设计

信访作为宪法赋予公民的权利体现,在保障公民合法权益方面发挥着十分重要的作用。针对理论上对信访功能的争论,笔者认为,回归权利救济功能的信访制度设计,才能真正按照权利救济的思路去处理信访问题。一、善待信访制度:法治背景下信访制度的必要性。目前,我国的信访工作已经进入了法治化的轨道。因此,从信访的文化传统及信访的制度确认、信访的功能表达考虑,要善待信访制度,在法治背景下坚持司法最终裁决纠纷的     

打破“诉访怪圈”,要走法治轨道

正最近,中央政法委印发《关于建立涉法涉诉信访事项导入法律程序工作机制的意见》等三个文件,力图解决"诉访怪圈"问题,让信访的归信访、法律的归法律。在社会主义法治国家,信"访"不信"法",不仅削弱法治,也会使信访制度不堪重负。早在2013年年初的全国政法工作会议上,涉法涉诉信访改革就已被确立为政法机关的四项重点改革之一。经过一年多的努力,越来越多的信访群众     

法治视野下对信访功能的思考

信访制度在历史上既发挥了联系群众的功能,又具有一定的权利救济功能。当前,信访制度仍有继续发挥权利救济功能的必要性。但信访制度行使权利救济功能毕竟与法治理念有所背离。在推进依法治国的进程中,应强化信访制度的联系群众功能,弱化其权利救济功能。     

涉诉信访实证分析

在法治不彰,司法没有终极效力之时,信访救济的存在无疑具有一定的制度合理性。目前信访救济是我国处于由"政"治型国家向"法"治型国家转变的过程中的特定时期的产物。引发涉诉信访的原因是多方面的,既有国家政策体制的问题,也有信访人的、司法人员、历史、时代的因素,但信访暴露了我们这个社会的弊端,促使我们积极的解决问题。虽然涉诉信访给我们带来了这样那样的不良影响,但任何一个事物都是辩证的,它对于促进我们国家社会发展起到了极大地促进作用。同时它是历史的产物,随着我国法治进程的进一步发展,立法的完善,司法人员素质的提高,民众法律意识的提高,司法效率和质量的提高,涉诉信访必将退出历史的舞台。     

流浪乞讨与管制--从贫困救助看中央与地方权限的界定

随着《收容遣送办法》的废止,个人自由权利与社会治安秩序之间的现实冲突比过去更为突显。应转变中央和地方关系的传统思维,在允许地方更多自主权和选择权的同时,更充分地保障公民个人的宪法基本权利。无论是中央和地方关系的法律界定,还是公民权利的宪法保障,都要求建立独立的司法机构以审查地方立法的有效性。     

International aid,trade and investment and access and allocation

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics - The access to goods and their allocation (who gets what, when, where and how) is one of the analytical problems of the 2009...     

Implementing and evaluating crime prevention and control programs and policies

The history of crime prevention and control efforts in the United States has demonstrated little progressive improvement in our ability to deter crime. The major obstacles to implementing effective interventions and policies have been a weak scientific knowledge base about how to prevent crime, the research community's inability to effectively disseminate what is known about the causes of crime and to translate this knowledge into operational programs and policies, and a resistance on the part of practitioners and policy makers to evaluate programs and policies and to use this information in the development of new programs and policies. In the last decade, there have been major advances in our understanding about the causes of crime and we have now demonstrated the effectiveness of selected prevention programs. But there is little evidence that this scientific knowledge is informing current practice or policy. Problems in the dissemination of this information and the resistance to utilizing it remain. These problems are discussed and suggestions are made for addressing them. Our knowledge base remains modest, but it is now sufficient to inform policy and practice. The research community must work to do a better job of disseminating this information and overcoming the resistance to utilizing it before we will be successful in implementing effective crime prevention programs and policies. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Accommodation and Satisfaction: Women and Men Lawyers and the Balance of Work and Family

This study of graduates of the University of Michigan Law School from the late 1970s reports on the differing ways that women and men have responded to the conflicting claims of work and family. It finds that women with children who have entered the profession have indeed continued to bear the principal responsibilities for the care of children, but it also finds that these women, with all their burdens, are more satisfied with their careers and with the balance of their family and professional lives than other women and than men.     

油气储运防火安全分析及预防措施

本文主要从设备故障与维护、防静电、动火作业、执行操作规程等几个方面引起的爆炸和火灾进行分析,制定对应的防护措施。提出了以做好设备维护保养、防静电处理、做好防火设计及安全装置、落实动火作业措施及强化安全培训等方面进行综合防控,消除油气储运过程中引起的爆炸和火灾,以实现安全生产。     

Truth and Justice, Inquiry and Advocacy, Science and Law

Abstract. There is tension between the adversarialism of the U.S. legal culture and the investigative procedures of the sciences, and between the law's concern for finality and the open‐ended fallibilism of science. A long history of attempts to domesticate scientific testimony by legal rules of admissibility has left federal judges with broad screening responsibilities; recent adaptations of adversarialism in the form of court‐appointed experts have been criticized as “inquisitorial,” even “undemocratic.” In exploring their benefits and disadvantages, it would make sense to look to the experience of other legal systems.     

真相与正义，探究与辩护，科学与法律

在美国法律文化塑造下的对抗制诉讼制度和科学的调查程序之间存在着紧张关系（tension），在法律所关注的裁决终局性（finality）和科学所追求的持续性纠错（oven—minded fallibilism）之间存在着紧张关系。长期以来，法律界都试图通过可采性法律规则归化科学证言，结果导致联邦法官担负起广泛的审查职责；近期，法庭指定专家的制度实践导致对抗制度做出某些修正，这种制度实践已经被批评为“带有纠问色彩”（inquisitorial），甚至“违背了民主的要求”（undemocratic）。在分析这些制度利弊的过程中，我们有必要考察其他法律系统的经验教训。