山西煤销集团晋城泽州公司发展纪实

解决发展难题——靠善于改革；解决创新难题——靠善于钻研；解决职工疾苦——靠善解民意。     

我们做律师快乐吗？——漫评“律师职业与生活”丛书

毫无疑问,律师首先是一种职业,但又并非一般的职业,而是靠专业和智慧来谋生的职业。有人说,律师是靠嘴皮子吃饭的;也有人说,律师是靠脑瓜子吃饭的。归根结底,律师是靠专业和智慧吃饭的。专业和智慧从哪里来?靠学习,靠不断地学习,靠在实践中学习,靠在书本中学习。经验有可能是自己的,也有可能是他人的。但书本只有靠自己去学习。于是,看什么书就成了一个问题。此前,我曾读到过天津律师张勇教授撰写的被誉为“最实用的律师圣经”《远见》一书。张教授在书中不仅仅为律师提出了改善自我的方法和标准,而且为所有希望成为自己所从事的领域中的佼…     

反腐倡廉与法制建设

<正> 党中央国务院作出在党政机关开展反腐败斗争的重大决策,深得党心、民心,受到全党、全国人民的普遍拥护。反腐倡廉靠什么?邓小平同志明确指出:“廉政建设要靠教育,要靠法制。”靠教育与法制,靠以德养廉与以法养廉,靠“德治”加“法治”,是反腐倡廉的治本之道。     

论点集锦

法治衰则“关系”盛李梓撰文说:某单位对1000名青年进行了问卷调查,在对“你认为现在办事主要是靠组织、靠关系、靠送礼”进行选择时,选择“靠关系”的41.5%,选择“靠送礼”的32.3%,选择“靠组织”的只有26.1%。这是对当今社会“关系”盛行的一个客观反映。在当代中国,上到达官贵人,下至草民百姓,恐怕谁也逃避不开“关系”;无论办     

制度化如何成为中小企业成长的天花板

如果企业做成了“一个人”的企业，那么这个企业是做不大、做不久的。一个长期发展的公司，一定要靠流程、靠制度，也就是要靠系统来使企业成为百年品牌，要把企业做成所有人的企业，做成大家的企业，只有如此，企业才能基业长青     

小农妇的执拗——中国首例居民告赢高速公路噪音污染案

自从家门口修起一条高速公路后，农妇蒋文霞一家四口说话基本靠“喊”，睡觉基本靠“捂”，日子过得提心吊胆、颠三倒四。     

法律不是反垄断的根本手段

一个经济体内部的垄断要靠开放经济来解决，自然垄断要靠科技的进步来打破，资源垄断要靠替代品的发现来冲破，国家造成的垄断要靠经济的极大发展和国家的消亡来根除，垄断行为的法律认定标准要随着经济的发展而不断修正。法律虽然是反垄断的重要手段，但不是根本手段，比其更重要的手段还有技术进步、发展垄断产品的替代品、推进开放经济的形成等经济类手段。因此，不能迷信反垄断法。     

加强自我锤炼 铸就过硬作风

当前,加强领导干部作风建设至关重要,而优良的作风源于高尚的情操。实践证明,培育领导干部高尚情操,既要靠外力推动,靠加大日常监管和约束力度,形成用制度管权、按制度办事、靠制度管人的有效机制,更要靠领导干部不断加强自我修养、自我修炼、自我修正。通过自我锤炼,塑造高尚人格,培育高尚情操,铸就优良作     

“三个靠前”夯实党风廉政基础

本刊石河子讯通讯员赵锦书石河子公安局城区分局幸福路派出所“三个靠前”夯实党风廉政基础。“三个靠前”是指思想动员靠前，把思想动员工作放在首位，第一时间召开全所民警动员部署会议，强调开展党风廉政教育月的重要性，要求全所民警严格按照教育月的学习计划进行，将党风廉政建设作为派出所公安工作的有力保障。     

坚持“两高”促进司法所建设上台阶

近年来．江西省全南县司法局按照中央关于加强“两所一庭”建设和全国司法所建设工作会议的精神．坚持“发展靠职能的发挥，职能发挥靠队伍的建设．队伍建设靠完善的体制”的思路，高标准、高起点，加强司法所规范化建设，活跃基层司法行政工作．在服务基层和构建社会主义和谐社会中发挥了积极作用。     

Beyond Otonomy, or Beyond the Law of Law's Ear

Can the relationship between law and literature be thought in terms of conversation? Can the law still ‘hear’ the voice of a writing that has come before it, yet outside the frame of the ‘hearing’ and the rules of ‘standing’? And when literature speaks, what does it say? Perhaps what the law has always known …     

To fix or not to fix? How corruptors decide to fix football matches

This paper examines the decisions of the internal corruptors in fixing football games. The methodology is a mixture of interviews, database analysis and examination of a specific series of taped phone calls of a corrupt Russian football official. It finds that generally, this type of match-fixing occurs only after a specific point in the season. There are five implicit questions that corruptors must answer: is the game important enough to fix? Is it morally ethical? Can my team win honestly? Can I afford to fix the game? If I am caught is there a high risk of sanctions? The second section of the paper examines the question of who to bribe? The data indicate that out of the three possible options – referees, players and team officials – the best chance of delivering a successful fix are the team officials. The final section is an examination of the use trust, favour banks and guarantors among the team officials who are willing to sell matches.     

Ignorance is bliss: self-regulation and Ag-Gag laws in the American meat industry

Abstract

In America, we like to say that we live in a democracy. Yet, it is difficult to believe that the majority would allow current practices to continue if citizens knew how the food animals they eat are treated – both during their short lives and during slaughter. The problem is that the citizens don’t know, and it is not a case of willful blindness. Take a moment to recall what you know about our meat industry. Can’t think of much? That is the goal of the meat industry: out of sight, out of mind. In several states, so called ‘Ag-Gag’ laws are designed to keep the truth from the public. In those states, it is a felony to obtain a job with the intent of being a whistle blower. The meat industry knows that if it were to be exposed, the public would demand better treatment of animals, a demand that would decrease profits for the meat industry. This paper will explain these ‘Ag-Gag’ laws in detail, explore their effect on our society, shed light on the practices that the meat industry tries – very successfully – to hide from voters and consumers, and examine the scary results that can occur when an industry is allowed to regulate itself.     

The Concept of Liberty in "A Theory of Justice" and Its Republican Version

Abstract. The Author offers three interpretations of the Rawlsian conception of liberty. At the same time he compares this formal version of civil and political liberty with the substantive version produced by the republican theory of liberty. The first question is this: Can liberties be unequal? Here the liberal concept of liberty is discussed linking human will of liberty and equality. The second question is: Can liberties be equal when their respective values are not? The Author stresses the Rawlsian distinction between liberty and the value of liberty showing the risk of reducing the less powerful to dependency. The third question is: Can political liberty be limited for the sake of personal liberties? From a republican perspective the answer to the Rawlsian instrumental conception of political liberty is that all personal liberties are necessarily founded on political liberty.*     

Editors' Note

So, what do our readers think? Is the state of the capital marketsa blip or is it the start of a slowdown? As your Editors penthis note, it sure is a little choppy out there. Whichever way you would place your bet on where it all goesfrom here, it would be difficult for any of us to complain aboutthe deal flow over the period that Capital     

Is technology transfer to subsistence farmers doubling nothing?

Editors Note: This commentary touches on an aspect of technology transfer to the Third World that often is neglected: Can the technology recipients afford to use it? Although the authors focus on the economics of shrimp production by subsistence farmers, affordability is one of the major concomitant issues of transfer from developed to developing countries.     

Vesting Agent-Relative Permissions in a Proxy*

We all have agent-relative permissions to give extra weight to our own well-being. If you and two strangers are drowning, and you can save either yourself or two strangers, you have an agent-relative permission to save yourself. But is it possible for you to ‘vest’ your agent-relative permissions in a third party – a ‘proxy’ – who can enact your agent-centered permissions on your behalf, thereby permitting her to do what would otherwise be impermissible? Some might think that the answer is ‘no’; it is definitive of agent-centered permissions that they apply only to the individuals ineliminably referenced in the content of that reason, which means that they lack reason-giving force for any ostensible proxy. The purpose of this paper is to (i) show that vesting agent-relative permissions is indeed possible, (ii) provide an account of how agent-relative permissions are vested by considering the structure of rights more generally, and (iii) show that we have a right to vest such permission in this way.     

Can the Law Speak Directly to its Subjects? The Limitation of Plain Language

Can we dispense with lawyers as intermediaries between the law and its subjects? Can laypeople have direct access to the law? The Plain English Movement (PEM) has long promoted the use of plain language in legal writing as the way to demystify the law, and many governments and private corporations have expended significant resources on drafting legislation and legal documents in plain language. This article argues that the PEM has exaggerated the capacity of plain language to render the law intelligible to the non‐lawyer, obscuring the deeper question of legal complexity by focusing solely on language and style. Using the law effectively requires expertise that goes far beyond understanding the meaning of the words used to communicate it: certain complex aspects of the law cannot be eliminated by mere simplification of language and this article demonstrates that other specialized skills are required over and above the ability to penetrate technical language. The paradigmatic illustration of the need for such skills is litigation.     

"Who is first on the scene?"

Forensic specialists are well standardised throughout the world and their opinions are respected by the courts. Doctors involved in the immediate clinical forensic assessment of persons in police custody are not, however, so well standardised. Some countries employ trained police surgeons or police medical officers, other countries rely on hospital interns, others simply accept the first doctor available. Can courts rely on their testimony? Can specialists depend on their skills? A call is made for such generalists to meet on an international basis to establish standards.     

Taking Capital Punishment Seriously

Although Asia is the most important region of the world when it comes to capital punishment, it is also one of the most understudied. This article identifies four research questions that deserve attention from students and scholars who believe taking capital punishment seriously requires studying Asia seriously too. What are the empirical contours of capital punishment in contemporary Asia? What are the histories of capital punishment in Asia? Can Western theories of capital punishment explain patterns and changes in Asia? And what is the future of capital punishment in Asia? If researchers take the trouble to explore these questions, the death penalty will not only become an interesting window into law and society in Asia, but Asia will prove to be an instructive window into the death penalty—the gravest real-life problem in the law.