警察执法权益保障的正当性分析

针对理论界关于警察执法权益保障问题的种种争议,需要重新界定警察执法权益保障的概念、内容、分类等基本问题,正视我国当前警察执法权益保障的现状,并从学理角度及实践角度分析其权益保障的正当性,为进一步探讨和建构警察权益保障机制奠定基础。     

论警察执法权益保障困境及解决对策

当前警察的执法权益屡遭侵犯,而警察执法权益的保障是关乎公民生存环境的国家大事,在当下的社会转型时期更具有特别的研究意义。保障警察的执法权益不是靠简单地建立一套执行机制便可一劳永逸的,它涉及法律保障、制度保障、社会保障、政策保障等各个方面。应当从警队内部体制、执法环境及法律法规方面入手予以修正,以改变当前警察执法权益保障不力的困境。     

论文化育警在解决警察执法困境中的作用

社会转型期,我国警察执法环境面临诸多困境。表层看,主要表现在警员不能适应警察职能转换、个别媒体报道失真、部分群众心理亚健康以及物质与身心健康权益保障缺乏等诸方面。深层看,高文化素质警察缺失是主要原因。要想摆脱这一困境,则需要从文化软实力着手,通过文化育警提升警察素质,从根本上解决警察执法困境问题。     

法治视野下的警察职务防卫权——兼论警察执法权益保护

警察职务防卫权作为法律赋予警察的一项特殊权力,具有截然不同的两种特性。如果运用得当,它能够成为警察震慑不法分子、保护自身合法权益、维护法律尊严的有力武器;一旦被滥用,它又可能成为警察滥权、欺凌弱者的工具。在法治已经成为我国基本治国方略的今天,运用法治基本理念对警察职务防卫权进行深入研究,无论对于普通公民合法权益的保护还是对于警察自身执法权益的保护,都具有异乎寻常的重要意义。     

国外警察权益保障机制对我国的启示

新形势下健全完善警察权益保障机制显得尤为重要,国外警察权益保障具有执法权威的绝对性、使用暴力的合法性、应对袭警的强硬性、组织机构的健全性、教育培训的广泛性、福利待遇的人文性的特点,我国警察维权机制的建立应借鉴国外的经验,首要是健全机构,完善制度,其次要求维权工作站在尊重事实、主持公道的立场,并做到要快速反应、主动出击,再次维权工作要讲究处理艺术,改进工作方法并争取全社会的重视和支持。     

论公务员权利保障制度的完善和发展

公务员法将保障公务员的权益作为立法目的之一.公务员权益的保障,不仅需要国家采取措施保障法律赋予公务员的权益得以实现,而且更主要的是应当建立公务员权利救济机制.本文认为,以法明确公务员依法履行职务的行为不受非法侵犯,国家保障公务员权益的实现,当对公务员实施不利处理时应严格依法定条件、权限和程序进行,建立公务员不利处理的事后救济机制,特别是将人事行政争议纳入司法救济范围是完善和发展公务员权利保障制度的重要举措.     

简论警察权益之保障——以公平正义为视角

警察权益遭受侵害的现象时有发生,不仅削弱了警察工作的积极性和主动性,也破坏了警民关系和和谐的社会秩序,背离了公平正义理念的诉求。因而,在全面了解警察权益遭侵害现状的基础上,以公平正义为视角,重新界定警察的角色和职能范围,完善相关的法律和保障制度,提高警察执法水平和人文素养,切实加强对警察权益的保护,就显得非常必要。     

关于刑事公诉案件被害人上诉权的思考

加强对被害人的诉讼权利保障已成为现代刑事诉讼发展的重要趋势之一,而上诉权是维护被害人利益的一项重要权利。我国现行刑事诉讼法虽然加强了对公诉案件被害人的权益保障,赋予其当事人的诉讼地位和一些诉讼权利,但并未赋予其作为当事人最为重要的一项诉讼权利——上诉权,从而影响了被害人诉讼权利的充分行使和合法权益的有效保障。     

从法律职能浅议消委会的角色归位

消委会承担着消费者权益保障的重任,但在实际工作中,消委会常常处于法律所赋予的职能无法发挥的尴尬境地,是增加其行政执法权还是促使其回归社会组织,消委会急需角色归位。     

浅论警察权与警察职权

警察权与警察职权是警察学基本理论问题之一,如何准确界定警察权与警察职权的概念,揭示其特征,构建警察权与警察职权的理论体系,对丰富、完善警察学基本理论,正确认识警察权与警察职权是十分必要的。本文从行政法学的角度,对警察权和警察职权的概念、特征、内容提出了一些见解。     

论我国宪法权利限制的实质、困境与对策

尽管享有权利是人类社会生活的一部分,但为了维护公共利益,个人宪法权利还必须受到限制。然而,权利限制的最终目的还是为了保障人的生存与发展,进而实现人的价值。由于诸多原因的影响,我国宪法对公民宪法权利的限制存在着一定的缺陷,不利于公民宪法权利的实际享有。因此,亟需从宪法权利限制的原则、方式和具体条文等方面完善我国宪法权利的限制。     

Religious Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage in Canada: Limits to Multiculturalism

The case of the opposition to legalizing same-sex marriage in Canada is an example of the limits of what will and will not be tolerated in the name of multiculturalism. This case offers an interesting perspective on the topic of multiculturalism, because it deals with a conflict between those seeking to expand human rights and those seeking to prevent such expansion because of their adherence to a particular set of cultural and religious beliefs. Despite Canada’s commitment to recognizing and encouraging diversity within its population, the demands of the opponents of same-sex marriage were not accommodated. Heeding the opponents of same-sex marriage would have amounted to violating the deeper commitment to individual rights and human rights as interpreted by the Charter. Multiculturalism in Canada is a concept that is situated within an underlying adherence to these core values.

What comes first,democracy or human rights?

Minimalists about human rights hold that a state can have political legitimacy if it protects a basic list of rights and democratic rights do not have to be on that list. In this paper, I consider two arguments from Benhabib against the minimalist view. The first is that a political community cannot be said to have self-determination, which minimalists take to be the value at the heart of legitimacy, without democracy. The second is that even the human rights protections minimalists take to legitimize institutions cannot be had without democracy. These rights can only be adequately interpreted and specified for any social context if the interpretations and specifications result from democratic processes. Here, I bring out some important problems with these arguments and so conclude that they do not represent a robust case for rejecting minimalism.     

Occupancy rights: dynamic as well as located

ABSTRACT

Anna Stilz’s Territorial Sovereignty (2019) aims to be a revisionist account of territorial rights that puts the value of individual autonomy first, without giving up the value of collective self-determination. In what follows I examine Stilz’s definition of occupancy rights and her emphasis on the moral relevance of what she calls ‘located’ life plans. I suggest that, if it aims at being truly revisionist, her theory should work with a broader definition of occupancy. So long as it doesn’t, these rights will be mainly the preserve of groups of settlers and peoples with predictable patterns of movement. Moreover, insofar as occupancy rights ground collective rights to self-determination, they actually have the potential to trump individual rights to what I call ‘dynamic’ or non-located occupancy. This is worrying, I claim, for at least two reasons. First, rights to dynamic occupancy are arguably as central for respecting individual autonomy as rights to located occupancy. And second, rights to dynamic ocupancy should be seen as key in helping to form the kind of political allegiances required to overcome the most pressing collective action problems that humanity faces.     

水权与水权的界定--水资源利用的产权经济学分析

在公有水权基础上实行可交易水权制度涉及到三个重要环节,即水权的界定、水价以及水权运作规则和水资源管理,其中水权的界定是水资源市场形成和运行的前提条件,没有排他性水权的确立,水权的让渡和交易是不可能的.本文从产权经济学的理论出发,分析水权的清晰界定与水资源市场的关系,并在此基础上分析水资源利用中的各种水权关系,指出进一步界定和明晰水资源的配水量权是实现水权制度创新的前提条件.     

Exploring citizenship spheres of inclusion/exclusion: rights as ‘potential for power’

ABSTRACT

Ariely examines the logic of inclusion/exclusion involved in the allocation of social, political and cultural rights to minorities. He argues that the unequal allocation of rights is determined by the degree of potential power inherent in the various types of rights, and that rights with more potential power, such as political and cultural representation rights, challenge the dominant group's position more strongly than rights to social welfare and cultural autonomy. Minorities are included at a higher level in spheres of rights with low potential power, and at a lower level in spheres of rights with higher potential power. He uses the case of the Arab citizens of Israel to illustrate the thesis, reviewing institutional practices of inclusion/exclusion as well as the attitudes of Israeli Jews towards the allocation of different rights as reflected in three attitudinal surveys.     

Citizenship and capability? Amartya Sen's capabilities approach from a citizenship perspective

This article deals with the potential contribution of Amartya Sen's capabilities approach (CA) for studying citizenship. Although the CA cannot be described as a genuine citizenship theory it has informed recent attempts to reformulate social citizenship. Moreover, it shares important aims and assumptions with radical citizenship approaches, which emphasise democracy, voice, and difference. Especially, Sen's ideas can help formulate positive notions of equality. However, a fruitful dialogue between those perspectives has to lead over some controversial issues. In this context, this article suggests more substantive notions of agency and interaction as well as integrating rights and rights language.     

Workers without rights as citizens at the margins

This article presents a normative account of citizenship which requires respect for labour rights, as much as it requires respect for other human rights. The exclusion of certain categories of workers, such as domestic workers, from these rights is wrong. This article presents domestic workers as marginal citizens who are unfairly deprived of certain labour rights in national legal orders. It also shows that international human rights law counteracts the marginal legal status of this group of workers. By being attached to everyone simply by virtue of being human, irrespective of nationality, human rights can complement citizenship rights when both are viewed as normative standards. The example of domestic work as it has been approached in international human rights law in recent years shows that certain rights of workers are universal. Their enjoyment cannot depend on citizenship as legal status or on regular residency. The enjoyment of labour rights as human rights depends, and should only depend, on the status of someone as a human being who is also a worker.     

联合国国际人权两公约之背景,内容与意义

联合国国际人权两以约是国际社会在人权保护方面最重要的两个公约。两公约诉产生过程,内容和执行体系,都表明国际社会在人权保护领域既普遍的共识,也有尖锐的分歧。两公约本身即是求同存异的产物,它是尽可能地融合了东西方国家对人权的不同理解,充实和发展了《联合国宪章》中关于基本人权的内容和为人权领域的国际合作提供了国际法依据。但是,人权进行国际法领域,并不意味着可以把人权作为攻击或干涉他国内政的工具,借口不人     

Unequal but fair? Cultural recognition and self-government rights

This review of Patten’s Equal Recognition suggests that minority rights can be grounded either in cultural accommodation rights or collective self-government rights. I defend four propositions: (1) individuals’ interests in membership in political communities cannot be reduced to their interests in being able to pursue their own conceptions of the good; (2) liberal states do not have to extend neutrality as equal treatment to self-government claims that intersect with their own jurisdiction; (3) claims for the establishment of public languages and territorial autonomy need to be justified on the basis of self-government rights rather than on grounds of equal treatment of cultural identities; (4) as a condition for their admission, immigrants can be expected to waive collective self-government rights rather than cultural protection rights.