Who speaks for whom? Implementing the Crown's duty to consult in the case of divided Aboriginal political structures

The Supreme Court of Canada has determined that the Crown has a duty to consult Aboriginal peoples on government decisions that may adversely affect their rights, but the Court did not define who the Crown should consult on behalf of Aboriginal people when two or more groups claim the right to speak for them. For government officials attempting to fulfil the Crown's duty, this can create challenges. This article reviews the jurisprudence and scholarly commentary to provide some guidance to government officials on how to effectively implement the Crown's duty to consult as a practical matter of public administration.     

Shifting scales of governance and civil society participation in Canada and the European Union

This article compares how the role and place of civil society groups in multilevel governance have evolved in Canada and the European Union (EU). It argues that, while the scope for engagement of organizations in the EU has broadened, it has been increasingly narrowed in Canada, to the extent that the policy process may be undermined. The article concludes with some insights from the EU experience in order to revive policy coordination in Canada as a governance technique.     

Comparing accountability relationships between governments and non‐state actors in Canadian and European international development policy

This article examines the alignment of different governance arrangements and alternative accountability mechanisms in international development policy making in Canada and the European Union (EU), with a particular focus on relationships between governments and non‐governmental organizations. The Canadian case illustrates an entrepreneurial mode of governance that aligns with fiscal auditing and performance management mechanisms, while the networked governance model of the EU relies more heavily on accountability instruments of public reporting and deliberation. The article concludes that the European accountability regime likely provides policy makers with more opportunities for social policy learning but would be difficult to implement in Canada given the underlying action logic of the federal government.     

欧洲共同体法院的直接诉讼

欧洲共同体法院 (EuropeanCourtofJustice)是欧洲共同体的最高司法权威 ,它的设立旨在确保欧洲共同体法律在成员国之间得以统一解释和遵守。直接诉讼 (Directactions)使得欧盟组织、成员国以及自然人、法人可以向欧洲共同体法院直接提起针对其他欧盟组织或者成员国的诉讼 ,是欧洲共同体法院受理的主要诉讼方式。     

Book Reviews

Book reviewed in this article: The Politics of Energy: The Development and Implementation of the NEP By G. Bruce Doern and Glen Toner . The Supreme Court of Canada: History of the Institution By James G. Snell and Frederick Vaughan . Reforming Human Services By Michael Clague , Robert Dill , Roop Seebaran , and Brian Wharf . Alberta's Local Governments and Their Politics By Jack Masson . Administration and Development in the Arab World: an annotated bibliography By Jamil E. Jreisat and Zaki R. Ghosheh . Managing New Technologies: the Information Revolution in Local Government Costis Toregas , editor. Bureaucracy in Canada: Control and Reform By Sharon L. Sutherland and G. Bruce Doern . Hate on Trial: The Zundel Affair, the Media and Public Opinion in Canada By Gabriel weimann and Conrad Winn . Tackling the Federal Deficit By Edward A. Carmichael . The Supreme Court of Canada as an Instrument of Political Change Royal Commission on the Economic Union and Development Prospects for Canada, Law and Constitutional Issues Series, Co-ordinated by Ivan Bernier and Andree Lajoie . The Dynamics of Government Programs for Urban Indians in the Prairie Provinces Raymond Breton and Gail Grant ed., with contributions from David L. Anderson , Harvey Bostrom , James Frideres and John A. Price . Maturing in Hard Times: Canada's Department of Finance through the Great Depression By Robert B. Bryce . Les politiques gouvernementales: élaboration, gestion, évaluation. By Michel Bellavance     

加拿大证据排除规则之确立与演变

加拿大的证据排除和英国有着天然的亲缘关系,加拿大旨在维护司法荣誉,英国旨在程序正义,在理念上,二者皆以人权保障为目的。1982年加拿大通过《权利与自由宪章》,其中包含有"救济",即第24条(2)的内容,如果发现对被告的宪章权利有所侵害,因此而获取的证据即会被排除。在多年的适用过程中,最高法院以一系案例为基础对24条(2)进行解释,分别衍生出了客观证据与自我归罪的证据、参与性与非参与性证据、可靠与不可靠证据等。     

论美国联邦最高法院对美国警察搜查权的调控——以非法证据排除规则的演变为视角

二十世纪六十年代以来,非法证据排除规则被美国联邦最高法院广泛使用,成为保护人民自由权利、限制警察非法搜查的尚方宝剑。但随着恐怖主义、毒品犯罪等的增多,加强警察执法权力,适当限制人民自由,成为联邦最高法院主导性理念。非法证据排除规则也随之产生了松动。非法证据排除规则对美国警察搜查权的影响历程,反映了联邦最高法院在保持个人利益与社会利益、自由与秩序之间的平衡做出的不懈努力。     

加拿大非法证据排除规则的法理依据

对不当或非法获取证据的排除是对侵犯公民宪法权利的一种救济。这说明在加拿大宪法权利从整体上而言被视为第一位的权利,应该得到最有效的保护。作为《加拿大法案》附表B的《权利和自由宪章》于1982年4月17日生效,其中包含有“救济”,即该宪章第24条第2项的内容。如果一经发现证据在获取过程中对被告所享有的宪章保障的权利和自由有所侵害,并且此种侵害会败坏国家的司法荣誉,依据本条规定,该证据即会被排除。在多年的适用过程中,加拿大最高法院主导了对第24条第2项的解释,解释以一系到案例为基础,而其法理依据却是自由主义理论、遏制理论与体系完整性理论。     

对"齐玉苓案"相关问题的法律思考

最高法院关于齐玉苓一案的批复涉及到对宪法第46条的解释,而根据我国宪法的规定,最高法院并没有解释宪法的权力。齐玉苓一案不需要直接适用宪法,不必用宪法去解决一个用法律就能解决的问题,该案件的性质是民事诉讼,而不是宪法诉讼。尽管如此,齐玉苓一案以及最高法院的批复对推进中国宪政体制改革仍然有积极意义。     

对《高院关于审理未成年人刑事案件具体应用法律若干问题解释》的理解与反思

最近,最高人民法院颁布了《关于审理未成年人刑事案件具体应用法律若干问题的解释》,这在司法实践中为更好地挽救未成年犯罪人提供了法律依据。但该解释颁布以来,也暴露出了一些问题,造成了司法机关办理未成年人刑事案件的困惑。     

论公诉权的能量——以撤回起诉和再行起诉为研究对象

我国1996年刑事诉讼法中没有撤回起诉的规定,但相关司法解释赋予了检察机关撤回公诉权。在目前的司法实践中,撤回起诉权遭到了一定程度的滥用。检察机关往往无时间、无次数限制地随意撤回起诉,然后再重新提起公诉,导致出现反复"撤回起诉——再行起诉"的程序循环现象,损害了刑事司法的尊严,侵犯了当事人的合法权益。其实,公诉权是有能量的,有一个耗尽的问题。因此,应当对国家追诉权进行必要的限制。     

Who pays the piper calls the tune? Comparing Canada's and the European Union's expansionary roles in pensions

Both Canada and the European Union (EU) have been active in developing pension policies despite the lack of formal mandates to do so. While the Canadian government used its fiscal powers to expand its role in pension programs when pension emerged as a policy issue, the EU has been strongly limited by its lack of resources, institutional complexities, and the maturity of public pension programs in its member states. The EU experience generates interesting lessons for Canadian policy makers who are dealing with increasingly complex pension issues.     

现行死刑复核制度存在的几个问题及对策性分析

经过理论界和实务界长期不懈的努力,死刑复核权终于回归最高人民法院.虽然在回归前后最高院及相关部门陆续出台了与死刑复核程序相关的配套规定,但仍存在一些亟待明确的问题.结合司法实践及最新出台的司法解释,从死刑复核的启动方式、复核方式、审理方式、审理范围以及参与主体等七个方面进行对策性分析,对我国早日建立起完善的死刑复核制度是有帮助的.     

The Anti-Inflation case: the anatomy of a constitutional decision

Abstract. The Supreme Court's decision upholding the Anti-Inflation Act may have been the Court's most important decision since becoming Canada's final Court of Appeal. While the federal government's wage and price control policy escaped a judicial veto, the Court's decision gave that policy only a temporary constitutional mandate. In so doing, the Court laid to rest, for the time being, any possibility that the national peace, order and good government power was to be dramatically expanded, but opened up the possibility of fairly easy access to the emergency use of the power in peacetime. By examining this decision in the context of the political and legal strategies of the parties, we may gain some valuable insights into the nature of judicial review in Canada. Among other things the case demonstrates the limited importance of judicial review in the politics of Canadian federalism. The Court's decision signals that a constitutional revolution is not about to occur, but the decision itself is not the major factor in preventing a centralizing shift in the balance of power. In fact the Supreme Court's decision reflects fairly accurately the balance of political power in the country. But while the case reveals how political the process of judicial review can be in Canada, still the end product of the process—the opinions of the judges—continues to be cast in a relatively legalistic' style. The Court may adjudicate constitutional disputes but it is not about to dispense constitutional wisdom. The case also teaches us something about the relative importance of economic and judicial resources in the political process. The main lesson is clear: bodi politicians and interest groups will risk losses in terms of long-run constitutional doctrine in order to secure important short-run policy objectives.     

The Subject Status of Procuratorate in Marine Litigation on "Public Interests Protection"

The litigations of marine natural resources ormarine ecological (environmental) damages involve two different types of litigations, and the procuratorate should be involved in the litigationsas different litigation subjects. The compensatory litigation of marine natural resource damageis the private interest litigation which relieves the private interest damage of state owned natural resources. According to The Administrative Litigation Law and The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate's Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation Cases, the procuratorate should be the supervising subject. However, the compensatory litigation of marine ecological (environmental) damage is the public interest litigation which relieves public interests, and on the basis of Marine Environment Protection Law, The Civil Procedure Law and The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate's Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation Cases, the procuratorate should be the supplementary subject. Due to the particularity of the marine litigations, the procuratoratefiles lawsuits against the marine natural resources ormarine ecological (environmental) damages, which shall apply both to The Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning Compensation for Damages of Marine Natural Resources and Ecological Environment and The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate's Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation Cases.     

浅谈死刑核准权收归最高人民法院后的程序完善问题

死刑核准权已经收归了最高人民法院,这种经历了辩证否定的权力回归是法治的胜利。但是随着相关司法解释的出台与施行,最高人民法院复核死刑的程序还存在一些纰漏和不足,如审理方式问题、对被告人进行讯问的问题、人民检察院及被害人是否应当参与的问题、辩护权问题、证明标准问题等仍然需要进一步地探讨和完善。     

关于最高人民法院两个罪名《法定》中的罪名设定定研究

文章认为 ,最高人民法院《关于执行 <中华人民共和国刑法 >确定罪名的规定》和《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于执行 <中华人民共和国刑法 >确定罪名的补充规定》存在“‘罪名从简’原则的事实否定”和“‘标准统一’原则适用的矛盾”等问题 ,并提出了作者的理论模型设计。     

论规制堕胎行为的考量

堕胎的问题,无论是医学伦理学还是生命伦理学抑或在法学领域内已早有讨论,但对胎儿是否为"人"或"位格之属性"尚未有定论。再者,就胎儿和孕妇关系而言,从"位格"特性之实体性、关系性、目的性分析了作为合二为一的"独立性实体"与"关系性实体"之间的关系,作为"关系实体"的胎儿应受到应有的尊重。德国联邦宪法法院坚持国家利益的立场,限制堕胎行为,对自由堕胎行为进行了规制,但也存在例外情形;美国堕胎案中,最高法院在韦德案秉持的是一种自由主义,堕胎是孕妇的一项宪法所保护的隐私权,而在凯瑟案中最高法院采取了限制堕胎自由,国家为了保护潜在的生命,可以限制堕胎。自此,堕胎自由式微,国家对胎儿有保护义务。     

美国审前讯问指导理论的沿革与发展

在1966年的米兰达判决以前,美国联邦最高法院规范审前讯问的指导理论一直处于不断的发展变化之中。在米兰达案件中,最高法院最终将反对强迫自证其罪特权确立为规范审前讯问的主要根据,并导致特权自身发生变化。沃伦法院之后,米兰达判决的宪法地位一度有所动摇。2000年,美国联邦最高法院又重申了米兰达判决的宪法地位。     

证券纠纷特别代表人诉讼制度完善之法律思考

2020年7月23日,最高人民法院审判委员会第1808次会议通过的《最高人民法院关于证券纠纷代表人诉讼若干问题的规定》中将"特别代表人诉讼"以专章规定列出,引发各界的广泛关注。近年来证券纠纷问题层出不穷。例如案件甄别及程序决定混乱、投资者保护机构权力扩大、"一案一立、分别审理"观念根深蒂固等等。文章建议支持扩大人民法院庭前审查的项目类型和内容;引入"投资者代表",以"双保险"模式维护投资者权益,同时允许投资者进行"二次推选"代表人;个案认定应本山取土、因地制宜,针对差异选择适用一案一立、普通代表人诉讼制度和特别代表人诉讼制度中的一种或数种。