Judicial Power in Russia: Through the Prism of Administrative Justice

This article assesses the power of judges in Russia (on courts of general jurisdiction, arbitrazh courts, and military courts) in dealing with cases in which the government or one of its officials is a party. Power, that is, the resources of judges to make binding decisions, is understood as including jurisdiction, discretion, and authority to ensure compliance. The article analyzes the dramatic growth of jurisdiction and caseload in administrative justice in post-Soviet Russia to the year 2002 and examines how the courts have performed in handling the review of actions by officials (including in the military), tax cases, electoral disputes, and the legality of normative acts (both regulations and laws of lower governments), especially in the late 1990s. High rates of success for persons bringing suits against the government suggest that judges were able by and large to adjudicate fairly and rule against the state. To a considerable degree (but not always), those decisions were implemented (more often than were constitutional and commercial decisions). Interestingly, citizens who challenged the actions of officials in court had much more success than those who brought complaints to the Procuracy. Finally, the article develops an agenda for future research that would deepen understanding of the significance of administrative justice in the Russian Federation and the power of judges.     

条条与块块关系下的法院院长产生

条块关系是不同于西方学术典范的解释中国现象的中国叙事框架。在中国政治语境中,较之中央地方关系更重要的是条条与块块关系。在地方法院院长产生的问题上,作为块块的上级党委和本级党委与拟任职法院的上级法院之间,对人选各有不同支配关系。在武装夺权年代确立的"块块为主,条块结合"的地方治理机制,在市场经济条件下获得新的政治考量意义。     

法院“人财物”问题研究——以法院审判权的独立行使为视角

我国之所以出现法院对地方政府的依赖以及地方政府对法院审判权的不当干预现象,根本原因在于目前法院的"人财物"管理方式存在制度性缺陷,即法院行政化的人事制度、依赖政府财政拨款的经费保障制度与现代审判权的运行规律存有内在冲突。它"后台"式地消解着法院的独立性,必须建立以符合法官职业特性和审判权运行规律的"人财物"管理制度,这是审判权独立运行的基石。     

我国行政复议与行政诉讼程序衔接之再思考

受具体国情的影响,各国立法有关行政复议与行政诉讼程序衔接的设置存在较大差别,并在总体上呈现出三种各具特色的模式;同时,公民权利有效救济的基准、司法与行政比较优势的发挥以及司法最终原则的贯彻也是各国制度演进所表现出的共性规律。我国行政复议与行政诉讼程序衔接的设置缺乏统一标准,既无助于行政纠纷的及时化解和公民合法权益的有效维护,甚至还会引发行政权与司法权的相互侵蚀。应当在借鉴域外模式经验的基础上,逐步取消行政复议终局型、重新设定行政复议前置型、严格限定迳行起诉型并大力推行自由选择型。     

深化改革背景下对司法行政化的遏制

司法行政化,即以行政的目的、构造、方法、机理及效果取代司法自身的内容,形成以行政方式操作的司法。法院司法运作的全过程均带有行政化色彩,表现为司法目的和价值的行政化、案件审判活动的行政化、上下级法院关系的行政化、司法人事制度和法院结构的行政化以及审判管理的行政化等。在给定的约束条件下,司法行政化可以弥补一线司法能力之不足,可以抗制外部干预。但其过度发展会妨碍依法治国,损害办案质量与效率,危及司法权威和公信力,阻碍法院工作的可持续发展。司法行政化的根源在于基本权力结构及其运行机制;司法功能设定的非司法化和资源配置的有限性,统一的人事管理制度和财政供应制度以及国家机能分化不足,亦为重要原因。遏制司法行政化需强化法院的司法审查功能、审判功能以及终局性纠纷解决功能;需阻隔行政性要素介入审判,建立审判独立的"二元模式";需在法院审判管理、司法行政管理、上下级法院业务管理上"去行政化"。     

关于完善我国行政问责制的思考

近年来,中央党政机关和地方政府出台了一系列有关行政问责的条例、办法和规定,一些官员被问责,行政问责制在我国有了很大的进展。但是,在行政问责的主体、对象、事项范围、程序与方式等方面还存在诸多问题。为此,我国应进一步完善行政问责制,强化异体问责主体,明确行政问责对象,拓宽行政问责事项范围,健全行政问责程序规则,严格采用准确、恰当的责任追究与承担方式,以期推动以人为本、执政为民的责任政府的建设进程。     

越南民商事管辖权制度探析

越南国会是越南最高权力机关和立法机关.越南法院分为三级:最高人民法院、地方人民法院和地区人民法院.对于"商事纠纷"的含义,在一些重要方面越南的规则与国际标准不同.<经济纠纷法>列举了经济法庭有权裁决的争议类型.包含"涉外因素"的经济案件,由越南经济法庭审理.地方(区)人民法院行使管辖权的依据是被告营业地或住所在法院管辖区内.管辖权的排除主要表现在以下方面:外交豁免与领事豁免、外国土地和管辖权选择协议.未决诉讼案件原则和不方便法院原则并没有得到越南法学家们的广泛承认.管辖权冲突问题由越南最高人民法院解决.     

Preemption of local smoke-free air ordinances: the implications of judicial opinions for meeting national health objectives.

Elimination of state laws that preempt local antismoking ordinances is a national health objective. However, the tobacco industry and its supporters have continued to pursue state-level preemption of local tobacco control ordinances as part of an apparent strategy to avoid the diffusion of grassroots antismoking initiatives. And, an increasing number of challenges to local ordinances by the tobacco industry and persons supported by the tobacco industry are being decided in state supreme courts and courts of appeals. The outcomes of seemingly similar cases about the validity of local smoke-free air ordinances vary significantly by state. This paper examines the common and unique aspects of the decisions and the potential implications of court rulings on preemption for future state tobacco control efforts and achievement of national health objectives around the elimination of preemption. Using a search strategy developed for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System, cases where a state or federal appellate level court made a finding on the validity of a local smoke-free air ordinance or regulation were identified in 19 states. In contrast to previous studies, we found that cases in approximately half of states were decided for local governments. We also found that across the states, courts were considering similar factors in their decisions including the extent to which: (1) the local government possessed the authority to pass the ordinance, (2) the ordinance conflicted with the state constitution, and (3) state statutes preempt the ordinance.     

审判中心视角下的行政诉讼制度构造

"以审判为中心"的政法政策同样适用于行政诉讼制度改革,它要求法院发挥自身司法能力和司法制度能力,有效地介入涉法行政争议之中,并藉此保护法益。在行政诉讼中,司法权与行政权之间是法律监督上的国家权力结构关系。法院优位于行政机关,法院作为独立裁判者指挥诉讼管理关系和裁判过程。以审判为中心的行政诉讼制度构造,应最大限度地发挥法院司法能力在解决行政争议上的优位角色,应完整地发挥行政诉讼法的制度能力,即发挥立法、司法解释、司法组织及指导性案例的制度功能。行政诉讼司法准入、行政机关负责人出庭应诉、诉讼管辖、庭审制度等,是否体现了"以审判为中心"的制度改革方向,主要看其是否有利于行政争议的实质解决和法益有效保护。"多元化纠纷解决机制"政策和行政行为合法性审查为中心的行政诉讼制度,影响了法院的诉讼角色和功能。回归司法权和诉讼制度本质,宜在行政争议、行政行为和法益之间构造出一致性的诉讼结构关系;宜从组织和体制改革转向程序改革,发挥行政程序和司法程序在塑造司法公正和司法效率上的作用。     

一体化进程中地方利益的冲突和法制协调

在单一制国家结构下的区域一体化发展中，仍然必须尊重和保护地方的正当利益。当面对冲突的地方利益和地方政府间的制度壁垒时。应主要依靠法制协调来解决纠纷。这种协调既包括中央政府通过制定有关区域发展的法律，或设立某种区域协调机构所做的努力，又包括地方政府间从地方性立法、地方行政和地方政治等方面进行的自主协调。     

我国宪制发展中短期态势评估

我国宪法确立了国家的基础性制度架构,内容包括若干基本宪法原则、公民宪法权利的范围及其保护、国家权力的横向和纵向配置,以及宪法的保障实施。我国宪制发展面对的课题可概括为以下几种:使政治、法律体制改革跟上经济体制改革的步伐;有效保障宪法确认的公民基本权利;实现执政党与国家关系的法治化;形成独立的有权威的司法体系;建立行之有效的违宪审查制度。我国完全可以在今后5-10年内实现一些具体的宪制改革目标,其中包括:初步实现政党以及执政党与国家机关关系的法制化;省、自治区、直辖市人大代表乃至全国人大代表由选民直选产生;修改选举法,容许人大代表选举实行竞选;实现不同职业选民的平等选举权;使司法机关相对于本级地方党委和本级地方其他国家机关有较大独立性;采取立法措施弥补公民基本权利法律保障方面的缺失;消除地方因权力过度集中于执政党的领导机构而形成的党的书记破坏法制、搞个人专制的问题;在全国人大内部设立宪法监督委员会作为设立宪法法院前的过渡措施;逐步终止地方国家机关正职领导人员选举和补选环节普遍违反法律原则的做法。     

Introduction: Problem‐Solving Courts

Problem‐solving courts have become a significant feature of the U.S. justice system, and their popularity appears to be growing internationally with courts under way or in development in countries such as Australia and Great Britain. Drug courts are the most visible type of problem‐solving court, but other varieties are beginning to take hold. Mental health courts, domestic violence courts, and community‐based courts among others are beginning to handle a considerable portion of the legal workload in many jurisdictions. Criminal law violations as well as neighborhood conflicts and interpersonal disputes are increasingly being referred to problem‐solving courts rather than to traditional criminal or civil courts.     

论行政协议

与行政合同不同的是,行政协议本质上是一种对等性行政契约。它的缔结,主要是合作各方的事,中央政府无法越俎代庖。但行政协议法这一制度平台是地方政府无能为力的,只能由中央政府来构筑和提供。只有制定行政协议法,中央政府才能对地方政府的协作实现法律监控,地方政府间的合作也才能稳固和得到法律保障。     

德国法院体系探析

德国特色法院体系的形成与演变有其深刻的社会历史背景,首先是文化传统,其次是经济体制,第三是工人运动。德国的法院系统由宪法法院、普通法院和专门法院三类组成。宪法法院专门审理违宪案件;普通法院只审理刑事案件和民事案件;专门法院包括(普通)行政法院、财政法院、劳动法院、社会法院、专利法院、军事法院和惩戒法院等。除了(普通)法院和宪法法院具有独立地位外,其他法院均隶属于政府有关部门。德国行政审判权由各级行政法院与劳动法院、社会法院、财政法院等共同行使。专门法院的性质介于行政机关与司法机关之间,但行政机关的性质更多(本质上属于行政司法)。     

The Influence of Administrative Law Judge and Political Appointee Decisions on Appellate Courts in National Labor Relations Board Cases

Scholars have long been simultaneously concerned with the factors that influence appellate court decision making and the level of deference that the courts allow for agencies. However, scholars have treated administrative agencies as unitary actors with a single level of decision making, but in reality agency decisions involve input from multiple actors within the agency. I argue that appellate courts rely more heavily on decisions made by actors in the bureaucracy with greater levels of expertise and who are less politically motivated as cues in their decision making. This theory is bolstered by legal precedent in the area of administrative law that suggests courts should more heavily rely on the expert judgment of administrative judges. Thus, as a result of their increased expertise, appearance of political neutrality, and institutional support, courts will be more reliant on decisions issued by administrative law judges (ALJs) than those issued by the political appointees as cues in their decision making. Using over 300 unfair labor practice decisions issued by the federal appeals courts on review of cases from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board), I develop a model of appeals court decision making in unfair labor practice cases as a function of the initial decision of the ALJ, the final order of the political appointees of the NLRB, case characteristics, the ideology of the deciding appeals court panel, Supreme Court influence, and economic factors. Though the ideology of the court plays a role in its decision making, cues from ALJ decision making and that of the Board weigh more heavily in appellate court outcomes. However, cues from ALJ decisions play the most consistent role in appellate court decision making, even in more difficult cases. This has important implications for agency strategy in courts and suggests that future research should consider the influence of lower‐level decision making over appellate court decision making in the area of administrative law.     

论电子政务中的行政送达——以北京希优案为例

电子政务的实行不是简单地通过网络改变行政手段,而是要从根本上转变行政理念。最高法院确立了在相对人接受电子政务化的行政处理方式的前提下,行政机关可使用网络公告的方式进行送达的规则,并根据网络送达方式的特殊性发展出了新的审查规则。法院对北京希优案的判决思路中暗含了正当程序原则,并据此提出了符合法院最低限度公正的行政告知要求。     

起草《政府信息公开条例》（专家建议稿）的基本考虑

政府信息公开对于促进经济增长、推进依法行政、实现人民的民主权利、治理腐败等具有重要的意义。学者起草的《政府信息公开条例》规定了权利原则、公开原则、利益平衡原则、不收费原则、自由使用原则、救济原则 ,并规定在县级以上人民政府设立信息委员会 ,受理人民对信息申请的申诉。同时 ,人民还可以获得提请行政复议、提起行政诉讼的救济。     

刑事裁判权主体初论

刑事裁判权的主体是裁判机关,但其又依靠具体裁判组织行使职权。我国法院与裁判组织设置方面存在法院地方化、审判委员会裁判案件、陪审员虚置等问题,笔者提出的完善建议是:1.将法院的人事权和财政权收归法院系统,依据司法管区设置地方法院;2.调整审判委员会职权,取消其裁判重大疑难案件的权力,并建立同级法官会审制度;3.陪审员应当有权参与庭前审查工作,并针对部分案件设立陪审团制,使其与原来的参审制形成优势互补。     

党政联合发文的信息公开困境与规则重塑：基于司法裁判的分析

由于具有横跨两个系统的多个制作主体,党政联合发文具有双重属性,并在实践中具有多种表现形态。在政府信息公开的制度实践中,该双重属性给党政联合发文的信息公开带来不小的困境,法院常因此类信息的制作主体包括党组织,因而具有党务信息属性而否定其作为"政府信息"的法律地位。该思路实际上是将双重属性简化为单一属性,最终促成了当前司法裁判中占据主导的形式化审查逻辑与规则,塑造了法院的退避立场。在依法推动党政联合发文信息公开过程中,法院应摒弃仅以主体要素作为识别标准的形式化审查,采用党务和政务标准来细化对职责要素的判断,再用内部性和外部性标准识别豁免规则,重塑此类信息的公开规则体系。     

Street as Courtroom: State Accommodation of Labor Protest in South China

Drawing on data collected from district-level governments, this article studies how the Chinese state responds to labor protests in South China. It examines both the internal logic and operational patterns of the state response involving the local courts and an assortment of government agencies. Internal documents and interviews reveal an emerging mode of state reaction. In the context of protest, the courts and related government agencies engage protesters on the street, which often grants a favorable resolution. This "street as courtroom" is a result of the weak capacity of the legal system coupled with a government-wide campaign to build a "harmonious society." These findings compel researchers to reconsider the institutional boundaries of the prototypical court, the outcome of social protest, and the appropriate role of the courts in China.