重庆“最牛钉子户”事件引发的法学及媒体责任思考（下）

（接上期）（二）关于公共利益公共利益如何界定是一个通俗而难解的话题。我国《宪法》修正案第20条规定：“国家为了公共利益的需要．可以依照法律规定对土地实行征收或者征用并给予补偿。”《土地管理法》第2条规定：“国家为了公共利益的需要，可以依法对土地实行征收或者征用并给予补偿。”《物权法》第42条规定：“为了公共利益的需要，依照法律规定的权限和程序可以征收集体所有的土地和单位、     

义务本位主义的刑事诉讼模式——论“坦白从宽、抗拒从严”政策的程序效应

《物权法》的规定完善了我国征收征用制度,包括区分了征收与征用、明确了征收征用权的主体为国家、明确了公共利益是征收征用追求的目的并明确了征收征用必须符合法定权限和程序以及被征收征用人获得     

宪法上公共利益概念分析

2004年我国宪法修订后规定，国家为了公共利益的需要，可以依照法律规定实行财产征收或征用并给予补偿。这些规定引起了学界对公共利益的追问，财产征收征用的必须是为了公共利益目的的提法是否符合我国国情，公共利益到底是什么，公共利益如何认定等问题。这些问题一直困扰着争论各方．在实践中也引起了混乱，至今未成定论。在宪法层面重新审视征收征用之公共利益目的，结合世界各国立法例，相应立法，从而合理构建我国征收征用法律制度体系。     

《物权法》中的征收、征用制度评介——一个宪法学的视角

我国《物权法》中规定的征收、征用是公益征收、公共征用。该公益征收、征用是具体行政行为,应由行政程序法来规范,不宜由物权法来调整。欲在私人财产权与公共利益之间求得平衡,规范公益征收、征用行为,专门的公益征收、征用立法是必要的。     

“公共利益”的困境与出路——美国公用征收条款的宪法解释及其对中国的启示

经过修正后的中国宪法规定:国家为了公共利益的需要,可以依照法律规定对土地实行征收或者征用并给予补偿(第10条第3款);可以依照法律规定对公民的私有财产实行征收或者征用并给予补偿(第13条)。征收或征用必须以“公共利益”为前提。因此,公共利益的界定至关重要。以美国的经验     

《征收与补偿条例》草案的几点进步

新的《征收和补偿条例》与原来的《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》相比，在几个方面进行了比较大的改动。 一、在适用范围上与《宪法》和《物权法》相统一 宪法规定，对土地进行征收或征用必须是出于公共利益的需要。《物权法》也规定，国家征收或者征用财产都要以公共利益作为支撑点。而2001年的《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》中并没有涉及到公共利益，     

私产在征收征用中的公法保障机制研究

公民私有财产权,不仅是私法中的权利,同时也是公法上的权利,应受到宪法和行政法的保护 基于公共利益需要而设置的征收征用制度,与公民私有财产存在着冲突,因而,在征收征用中应给予私有财产以充分的保护。这种保护应通过多种保障机制来体现:一是目的保障机制,确立私有财产的概念及其确认制度、公益判断制度以及私有财产与公共利益权衡制度;二是程序保障机制,在征收征用实施中,设定审查决定 命令实施、当事人异议、听证等一整套具有良好可操作性的保护公民私有财产的制度;三是补偿保障机制,遭循充分、及时而育效的原则给予相对人金钱或实物的补偿。     

城市房屋拆迁中的权力与权利的冲突与保护

一、我国关于土地征用和房屋拆迁的立法规定(一)我国宪法中关于土地征用与房屋拆迁的立法规定我国《宪法》第10条第3款规定:“国家为了公共利益的需要,可以依照法律规定对土地实行征收和征用,并给予补偿。”这样的规定使得因土地被征收而失地的农民和因土地被征用而失去使用权的原土地使用权的拥有者因土地被征收或征用而受到的损失在宪法层面得到保护。第13条第1款规定:“公民合法的私有财产不受侵犯。”第2款规定:“国家依照法律规定保护公民的私有财产和继承权。”这些规定都表明,公民具有合法的房屋所有权的房屋,作为私有财产受宪法保护…     

完善公益征收征用法律制度的思考

制定公益征收征用法 ,明确相关概念、界线 ,从而完善公益征收征用法律制度 ,已显迫切。公益征收征用的对象应包括无形资产和集体所有财产 ;公共利益应定位为不特定多数公众的共享性公益 ,应采用列举式立法例加以界定     

公益征收初探

征收和征用是现代法学上的两个重要概念 ,我国现行法制混淆了二者的区别。公益征收合法性的基础在于 ,征收的公益目的性和公正补偿性。我国应建立完善的公益征收制度 ,明确公共利益的范围和界限 ,并规定补偿的原则和基本标准。     

利用影响力受贿罪若干问题解读

《刑法》第388条之一是关于利用影响力受贿罪的规定,该法条来源于《刑法修正案(七)》第13条之增设性规定,旨在从严预防和惩治贿赂犯罪。尤其是针对以往不具有国家工作人员身份的人(主要是国家工作人员的"身边人"以及离职的国家工作人员和他们的"身边人"等)索取或收受贿赂后因惩处缺位而借以逃脱法律制裁的状况,立法上作出了相应的改进。然而,在增设了利用影响力受贿罪这一罪名后,必须考虑其与原有的贿赂犯罪罪刑体系如何衔接与协调,特别是有必要对该罪的罪名确定、主体范围、行为特征以及司法适用等问题进行深刻地解读。     

公用事业特许经营中的临时接管制度研究——从“首例政府临时接管特许经营权案”切入

在公用事业特许经营的实施过程中,当公共利益遭受或面临重大损害时,监管者有权采取临时接管措施来保障公用事业运营的连续性和稳定性。我国公用事业特许经营临时接管制度立法明显滞后,临时接管权的行使隐藏着巨大风险。为了保障临时接管权的正确运用,防止特许经营者的合法权益遭受损害,未来立法应当着重就临时接管的主体、条件、程序、终止等问题做出统一规定。     

Law Centres, Citizenship, and Participation

It's difficult to redirect things once we'd started up as a casework agency. It's difficult to keep casework under control. Cases can only be related to one another; if you justify taking on one case, it's difficult to avoid taking on similar cases. There is still not sufficient priority given to educational and community work. This is so because of the demands of [individual] casework … It's difficult to change approach from casework to educational and community work. (Lawyer at the Urban Community Law Centre)
From the beginning we have attempted to do work with people rather than for them. This has meant that wherever possible we have brought people with similar problems together so that they learn how to cope with different establishment bodies … more important, they realize they can exercise control over their own lives. Whether we help an individual deal with his or her own personal problem, or help a group of people get to grips with whatever is oppressing them, our main aim is to inculcate a practical philosophy of self-reliance. (Statement of aims of the Northern Neighbourhood Law Centre¹)     

“ 金蝉”不再“ 脱壳”——论营业转让中债权人的利益保护

营业转让中债务人通过“金蝉脱壳”之计逃废债务的现象频发，为了改变债权人所处的不利地位，需要从法理上澄清现行债务承担规则存在的迷乱，同时梳理国内外的相关制度，在比较借鉴的基础上，全面建构债权人利益保护机制：一是完善债权人知情权的实现程序，建立债权保护的事前防范机制；二是夯实债务承担规则的法理基础，重构债权保护的事后救济机制。     

建设工程优先受偿权与其他权利竞存的探析

建设工程价款优先受偿权制度的确立,对于解决日益严重的工程欠款问题无疑是一剂良方,但在司法实践中,建设工程价款优先受偿权在实现过程中却遇到了诸多障碍,其中建设工程价款优先受偿权与其他权利竞存的处理,直接关系到建设工程价款优先受偿权的实现,实践中应按下列原则处理:第一,建设工程价款优先受偿权与一般抵押权发生冲突时,承包人的建设工程价款优先受偿;第二,当两个以上承包人对同一建设工程享有工程价款优先受偿权时,应该按各建设工程承包人的债权比例清偿;第三,消费者交付购买商品房的全部或者大部分款项后,承包人就该商品房享有的工程价款优先受偿权不得对抗买受人.商品房的所有权已转移给消费者时,承包人的优先受偿权不可对抗消费者的房屋所有权.     

损害赔偿额之酌定:基于诉讼公平的考量

在损害发生得以证明,但损害大小难以证明或不能证明时,法院若判决驳回原告诉讼请求,将不符合诉讼公平的要求。为弥补这种因需完全证明带来的不公平,德日等国家和地区在理论上和立法实践中确立了法官损害赔偿额酌定制度。我国引进该制度时,在理论上应厘清概念的含义应为"损害赔偿额酌定"而非"损害赔偿额认定"。在实践中,应明确该制度的适用要件,并采取合理的酌定方法。     

The Declaration of War in the Dutch Constitution and Models of Legal Communication

Models of communication,frequently used in legal semiotics, offer ananalytic framework for the relationship betweenlegal rules on the one hand and correspondingsocial behaviour on the other. Semiotic modelsseek to clarify (un)successful legalcommunication; they try to reveal the processesof interpretation and sense construction. Inthis paper, these processes are described,taking Article 96 of the Dutch Constitution asan example. Although the text of Article 96 hasremained nearly unchanged, its substantivemeaning has changed fundamentally. Thebackground and development of the `declarationof war', as laid down in Article 96, areanalysed and fully elaborated. It is concludedthat the classical models of communication,largely based upon the idea of the existence ofa linear relationship between rule and conduct,hardly correspond with the complex processes asdescribed in the analysis of Article96 Communication between rule and practice isobviously more than a one-waycausality, in which rule information `flows'from sender (legislator) to receiver (citizen).The institutional model of communication,developed by Ruiter, offers a different approach.The institutional model is based on the notionof law as `institutional landscaping';realisation depends on common beliefs andgeneral acceptance. The influence of the socialpractice on the meaning of legal rules becomesan important factor. The institutional theoryseems to offer a more adequate model for thecomplex reality of legal communication.     

Discretionary review and undesired cases

Courts sometimes face cases that may result in adverse post-judgment official or public reactions. Such real-world repercussions—e.g., open defiance by public officials—can be more costly for the court than the benefit of hearing and deciding the case. In these situations the court may be better off not taking the case from the outset. This paper examines how courts deal with such cases when they can avoid adjudication—discretionary dockets. Using a stylized screening model, the paper examines the implications of such discretion. In particular, it shows that some undesired real-world outcomes are inevitable; and that broad control over their dockets should lead judges to take fewer cases in which the government is involved. Further, the paper discusses this logic from a comparative design perspective. The two prevalent models of judicial review, the American and the European, seem to take opposing stances on discretionary review; however, both narrow supreme courts’ control over their dockets, either by directly limiting their discretionary jurisdiction or by decentralizing judicial review.     

Regulations for in vivo radiopharmaceuticals used for diagnosis and monitoring; extension of comment period--FDA. Proposed rule; extension of comment period

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is extending to October 15, 1998, the comment period on a proposal rule that was published in the Federal Register of May 22, 1998 (63 FR 28301). The document proposed to amend the drug and biologics regulations by adding provisions that would clarify the evaluation and approval of in vivo radiopharmaceuticals used in the diagnosis or monitoring of diseases. The agency is taking this action to provide interested persons additional time to submit comments to FDA on the proposed rule.     

新型工业化与制度创新初探

实现新型工业化是我国现代化进程中艰巨的历史任务,不仅需要结构创新、技术创新,更需要制度创新。制度创新是一个带有根本性、全局性、稳定性和长期性的问题,它决定了工业化道路的选择。经典学者对制度创新与经济发展的关系作出了精辟的论述,认为在市场经济中,制度至关重要。国外工业化进程中制度创新的实证经验,为我国走新型工业化道路提供了启示和借鉴。我国要实现新型工业化,必须选择制度创新的正确战略,通盘考虑,重塑制度,构建中国特色新型工业化的制度体系,从制度上为实现新型工业化铺平道路。