中国土地执法摇摆现象及其解释

中国土地执法实践呈现“摇摆现象”,即有时执法有效,有时执法失灵。执法摇摆现象的发生,并非完全因为法律不完备或者土地执法部门能力有限,还在于中国集中体制下的“嵌入式执法”。在中国国家体系中,土地执法部门被嵌入在集中体制及其建构的中心工作中。在中心工作完成过程中,土地执法部门真正完成的并非其职能目标,而是集中体制目标。不同中心工作的建构,导致土地执法效果可能有效也可能失灵,呈现出摇摆不定的执法效果。集中体制本身的分化,即中央和各级地方政府目标重点的不同,也使得土地执法效果更不可预期。     

Redressing the imbalanced political market for health policy: a role for the state attorney general?

In current discussions of "procompetitive" approaches to health policy, the enforcement of antitrust laws in health care markets is a strategy that has attracted increasing attention: the filing of consumer-oriented health suits provides a means to "redress" the typically imbalanced "political market" in health policy. This study examines an important aspect of the antitrust enforcement process, the decision by a state attorney general to undertake an aggressive antitrust enforcement program in the health area. Three variables were found to explain this decision: the political needs of a "politician-supplier," the organizational resources of a strategic institutional position, and the availability of a relatively favorable policy arena. An assessment of the future role of state attorneys general in this area suggests that their health antitrust initiatives will increase, but that various political and resource constraints are likely to inhibit their aggressiveness in pursuing these actions.     

对我国民事执行中实体争议救济的考量

我国现行法律在民事执行当事人和大量实体问题争议事项上存在救济缺失的同时,也为处理民事执行中实体问题争议提供了僭妄的条件。在对关乎缺失和僭妄的民事执行中实体问题争议救济主体、事项、处理方式和处理机构四个方面的考察论证后认为,针对民事执行中各种实体问题争议,应设置不同层次和充分空间的救济;处理民事执行中实体问题争议既应通过诉讼的方式,也不能排斥非诉(异议)的方式;其处理机构应在多元模式中,根据我国的具体情况确立。     

Adjudicating Executive Privilege: Federal Administrative Agencies and Deliberative Process Privilege Claims in U.S. District Courts

Government transparency is a key component of democratic accountability. The U.S. Congress and the president have created multiple legislative avenues to facilitate executive branch transparency with the public. However, when the executive branch withholds requested information from the public, the federal judiciary has the power to determine whether agencies must release documents and information to requestors. When enforcing standards of executive branch transparency, judges must balance concerns of executive autonomy and judicial intrusion into administrative decisionmaking. While much judicial scholarship focuses on the decisionmaking on high courts, in the U.S. context, federal district courts play a key role in adjudicating transparency disputes. In this article, I examine case outcomes in disputes involving agency claims of deliberative process privilege over internal agency documents litigated between 1994 and 2004. I find that U.S. federal district courts largely defer to administrative agencies in transparency disputes. However, factors such as agency structure and the congruence between judicial and administrative agency policy preferences influence whether federal judges require executive branch officials to release requested information.     

Medicare program; provider reimbursement determinations and appeals. Final rule

Subpart R of 42 CFR part 405 consists of regulations governing Medicare reimbursement determinations, and appeals of those determinations, by health care providers. (For the sake of simplicity, throughout this final rule, we use "reimbursement" to refer to Medicare payment under both the reasonable cost and prospective payment systems.) Under section 1878 of the Social Security Act (the Act) and the subpart R regulations, the Provider Reimbursement Review Board (the Board) has the authority to adjudicate certain substantial reimbursement disputes between providers and fiscal intermediaries (intermediaries). Board decisions are subject to review by the CMS Administrator, and the final agency decision of the Board or the Administrator, as applicable, is reviewable in Federal district court. In addition, under the subpart R regulations, intermediaries have the authority to hold hearings and adjudicate certain other payment and reimbursement disputes with providers. This final rule updates, clarifies, and revises various provisions of the regulations governing provider reimbursement determinations, appeals before the Board, appeals before the intermediaries (for lesser disputes), and Administrator review of decisions made by the Board.     

行政执法权全面下移的组织法回应

虽然行政执法权全面下移工作已然铺开,但我国现有法律规范体系并未为其提供充足的规范基础,既有的行政组织结构及其相应规则也没有为镇街有效承接执法权做好充分准备。行政执法权全面下移依然承受着合法性与有效性的双重考问。以《行政处罚法》为框架的分析思路,并不能为消弭质疑提供有力支撑。行政执法权全面下移带来了镇街行政法身份、规模与组织形式、与区县人民政府职能部门的关系等方面的变化。这些变化意味着行政执法权全面下移属于执法权配置的结构性变迁,因而只能在组织法框架下探寻其解决之道。具体而言,应当通过《地方各级人民代表大会和地方各级人民政府组织法》的修改赋予镇街执法主体资格,在此基础上以行政法规、地方性法规等形式安排镇街机构设置与人员编制,理顺镇街执法与县(市、区)职能部门的关系,并为镇街执法提供必要的财政保障。     

完备水法构建与水资源保护研究

水资源保护与水资源污染防治是世界各国普遍关注的重要问题,中国水资源的人均占有量仅是世界水资源人均占有量的四分之一。本文针对中国水资源现状,系统分析了影响我国水资源保护与水资源污染防治的社会因素和法律因素,并结合中国河流、湖泊的分布特点,提出了中国水资源保护与水资源污染防治的方法、技术和法律机制的构建。     

共有不动产执行中的争议处理——兼论执行立法草案相关条文的内容构成

共有不动产的执行是实务中的难点之一。其难处主要在于如何处理“析产”所引发的种种争议,对于这些争议的处理解决往往牵涉到“执行程序与诉讼程序”“执行部门的诉讼与另行起诉”“查封阶段与处置阶段”等因素的选择组合,在理论上则存在着“形式审查说”与“有限实质审查说”之观点分歧。以夫妻共有不动产的执行为研究重点,在梳理执行实务中常见应对方式的基础上,就相关争议的处理解决及基本程序的构建进行分析,并对民事强制执行立法草案既有的若干方案作出评价。     

COMPARING ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE

Among the many important changes wrought by Regulation 1/2003are the decentralization of responsibility for enforcing EUcompetition law from Brussels to Member States and the creationof the European Competition Network to encourage coordinationand information-sharing among the 26 competition authoritiesin the EU. This article contrasts Europe's new system of competitionenforcement under Regulation 1/2003 with that of the UnitedStates. I focus upon two of the more significant features ofthe U.S. system: the dual legislative and enforcement authorityof the States and the Federal Government, and private enforcement.The Commission is presently evaluating measures to facilitateprivate enforcement and is set to release a Green Paper on thattopic later this year. I highlight a few characteristics thathave made private enforcement such a significant component ofthe U.S. antitrust regime, in some ways and at some times providingtoo much incentive for plaintiffs, at the expense of neutralor procompetitive business activity.     

从社会管理创新角度看城市管理领域相对集中行政处罚权制度的完善和发展

当前,工业化、信息化、城镇化、市场化、国际化进程不断加快,经济社会结构、利益格局、思想观念深刻变革,我国社会管理理念、体制机制和方式等也随之创新。作为社会管理的重要组成部分,城市管理领域相对集中行政处罚权制度及其实践,在我国已有15年的历程,取得了一定社会成效,也存在诸如执法理念滞后、执法体制机制不顺、执法不规范等需要加以改进的问题。破解这些难题,需要顺应经济社会发展的新形势,从社会管理创新的整体角度对其进行系统反思。     

Are international environmental agreements enforceable? implications for institutional design

Over the past several decades, European international environmental institutions have evolved, heeding institutionalist calls for stronger institutions backed by sanctioning and dispute settlement mechanisms. This apparent increase in institutional strength has led to a corresponding increase of the behavioral effectiveness, or active compliance management of institutions as observed in the incidence of arbitral tribunal decisions. However, upon closer examination, it is apparent that this behavioral effectiveness has not been exclusively due to provisions for arbitral tribunal decisions within international environmental agreements. Rather, the incidence and enforcement of these arbitral tribunal decisions is linked to the institutional design of the enforcement mechanisms. Most international environmental agreements rely on parties to raise disputes and enforce commitments, causing individual countries to bear the cost of enforcement. In addition, bringing a dispute to an arbitral tribunal requires the accordance of the parties to the dispute. In contrast, the European Court of Justice allows for enforcement to originate from a strong central authority and for the cases of arbitration to be filed unilaterally. International environmental agreements that have been joined by the European Community and have a provision for an arbitral tribunal have stronger enforcement mechanisms, are more likely to result in enforcement action, and are more effective in generating behavioral change.     

我国危机处置法的立法模式探讨

我国危机处置法存在重特别的危机立法、轻统一的危机立法,重实体、轻程序,重分散型的应急机制、轻整合型的应急机制,重封闭性的应急机制、轻开放性的应急机制等缺陷。危机处置法的目标模式应兼顾效率和保障公民权利。法体模式应是统一立法与单行立法相结合。制度模式应以危机的发生与发展过程和应对危机的机制为设计主线,主要包括危机状态的决定和宣布制度,实施制度,变更、撤销和终止制度,以及危机状态的信息预警制度,应急储备制度,协调制度和社会支持制度等。     

论节目名称商标侵权纠纷中“商标性使用”的判定——从“奇葩说”商标侵权案谈起

近年来,节目名称与已注册商标之间的商标侵权纠纷频发,然而,各个法院对于在节目名称中使用他人商标标识是否构成商标性使用,却尚未形成相对一致的判断标准。鉴于合理划分节目名称与节目商标以及平衡节目名称利益与他人商标利益的需要,商标性使用的判定在处理此类纠纷时具有重要意义。依据商标性使用的应有内涵,在司法实践中,应综合考量被诉侵权者在节目名称中使用标识的主观意图、使用行为产生的客观效果以及是否属于描述性正当使用的因素,以准确判定商标性使用的事实。     

商标法调整域名争议的实证分析

域名注册与在先商标的争议,司法实践先于法律,司法判例尽管并不一致,但均对驰名商标以特别保护,其保护均体现出商标法上保护的痕迹。但并非所有的商标都享有同等的保护,原因在于商标侵权理论的“误认”标准。《商标法》天然适用于域名侵权争议的本质———商业领域扩展的必然结果。《商标法》调整域名侵权争议的范围是有限的。     

A call for balancing of agency sentinel priorities

Currently, a plethora of enforcement initiatives are directed at the healthcare industry. This Article suggests that budget and time allocations for issuing regulations and guidelines to interpret the law in this area have been disproportionately set when compared to the budget and time allocations set to support these enforcement initiatives. As a result, HCFA and OIG have been seriously delinquent in providing the industry with needed regulatory guidance and workable instructions. The use of enforcement initiatives in lieu of formal rulemaking to regulate the industry accords little respect to the legitimate healthcare providers who constitute the vast majority of the industry. This Article calls for a reexamination of enforcement agencies' priorities to provide regulatory guidance through formal rulemaking, rather than through use of coercive enforcement initiatives.     

非诉讼行政执行相关问题探究

在我国,具体行政行为执行采取何种模式存在争议。非诉讼行政执行在具体行政行为内容的强制实现上发挥着重要作用,其功能在于,一方面是为了表明行政相对人在法定期限内未行使诉权启动诉讼程序,另一方面是借助司法力量和程序保障个案正义,确保在较短的时间内,使用较小的成本,完成合法具体行政行为的内容的强制实现。     

中国-东盟自贸区投资争端解决机制的困境与出路

随着"一带一路"建设各项措施的推进,中国与东盟的投资合作有了迅猛发展,然而,投资合作的发展速度与投资冲突的产生成正比。当前中国与东盟签订的一系列协定虽为双方投资争端的解决指明了方向,但这些解决投资争端的方式在实践中存在着制定脱离于实践、适用范围受限等不足,其已不足以充分解决新增投资领域的诸多争端。对此,应立足于中国-东盟自贸区自身的特征,结合投资争端的特殊性,从适用主体、适用范围、解决程序等方面对中国-东盟自贸区投资争端解决规则进行优化,以期适应自贸区的长足发展。     

Chinese Judicial Practice in Private International Law: 2003

This survey is an analysis of Chinese judicial practice in mattersrelating to choice of law in over 50 civil and commercial casesin 2003. It first presents a statistical analysis of the casesin several tables and then highlights several particular issuessuch as renvoi, inter-temporal conflict of laws, jurisdictionalcompetition between judicial settlement of disputes and arbitration,and recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.     

COMPLEMENTARITY AND COOPERATIVE JUSTICE AHEAD OF THEIR TIME? THE UNITED NATIONS WAR CRIMES COMMISSION,FACT-FINDING AND EVIDENCE

Today, many international criminal lawyers claim that the future of international law is domestic. The example of the United Nations War Crimes Commission (UNWCC) shows that this might not only be the future, but also the past. This article analyzes the practice of the Commission (1943–1948), with a particular emphasis on facts, evidence and interaction with domestic authorities. It argues that the UNWCC marked an early counter-model to the idea of military justice that prevailed in many World War II accountability initiatives, and an alternative to the centralized and situation-specific enforcement model under the umbrella of United Nations (UN) peace maintenance. The Commission represents a cooperative approach to justice and sovereignty that has got lost in the course of the second half of the twentieth century. In the mid-1940s, attention shifted quickly, and perhaps too early from the UNWCC itself to the idea of centralized enforcement under the umbrella of an International Criminal Court. The work of the Commission foreshadows many core dilemmas of contemporary international justice, including debates over independent investigative authority, proprio motu powers, the labelling and origin of core crimes (e.g. aggression, crimes against humanity), the treatment of group criminality (e.g. attribution of conduct) and evidentiary standards in proceedings. Similar structures are gradually re-emerging in the context of regional integration (e.g. ‘mutual trust’ under the European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice) or the operationalization of complementarity under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). But in terms of cooperation between major powers and use of international expertise and advice in criminal proceedings, international criminal justice is still in search of a modern UNWCC 2.0.     

Determinants of the university technology transfer policy-mix: a cross-national analysis of gap-funding instruments

University–industry technology transfer (TT) has become increasingly institutionalized and is supported by numerous reforms and initiatives at the national, regional and university levels. Most countries have implemented a policy mix involving a range of instruments to support the commercialization of research. Still, there is no systematic evidence indicating why the mix of policy instruments differs between countries. This study offers a novel cross-national investigation of the policy mix emphasizing the level of centralization and decentralization of policy instruments. We map and analyze two specific types of public instruments aimed at addressing the so-called funding gap in TT: proof of concept programs (POCs) and university-oriented seed funds (USFs). Based on a survey across 21 European countries, we find that such instruments are widely used but are organized differently depending on the level of implementation of TT practices in the country and the specific type of instrument considered. More precisely, we find a U-shaped relationship between the use of centralized gap-funding instruments and the country’s implementation of TT practices. Moreover, the type of gap-funding instrument (POC or USF) moderates this relationship. We discuss the implications of our findings and suggest that the policy mix of gap-funding instruments evolve with the maturity of the national TT infrastructure.