STUDY ON THE CHALLENGES AND PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES TO REHABILITATION IN CHINA

Obtaining effective rehabilitation and gaining access to full development services are fundamental for children with disabilities to fully participate in society and achieve social inclusion. A disabled child’s right to rehabilitation is specially protected by law in China and internationally. Chinese law specifically provides that the State shall ensure the enjoyment of the right of children with disabilities to rehabilitation services. This study shows that in the last five years, the rehabilitation services for children with disabilities are generally improved. But due to the incomplete protection mechanism, the right of children with disabilities to rehabilitation still could not be fully realized. This article concludes that the rehabilitation situation of children with disabilities in China presents the general feature of lacking of opportunities and structural imbalance. The Chinese government should take more responsibility to improve the rehabilitation system for children with disabilities. Specifically, the Chinese government should undertake the obligations as stated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to provide rehabilitation services for all children with disabilities. To ensure the effective implementation of the right of children with different disabilities in different areas, China shall improve the rehabilitation legal system, establish an urban-rural integral rehabilitation system, enlarge financial invest and increase professional level of rehabilitation staff.     

EQUALITY,DIGNITY, AND SOCIAL HARMONY: EXPLORING THE RATIONALES AND MODELS FOR RECOGNIZING SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS IN LAW

One of the major changes that has taken place over the past twenty to thirty years has been the extension of the legal recognition and protections for same-sex relationships in a wide range of countries. A number of jurisdictions, including China, are considering the approach that they will adopt. This article seeks firstly to consider the justifications for the legal recognition of same-sex relationships by the state. Three main, compelling rationales are identified which are rooted in notions of the equality of all persons, the dignity and liberty of individuals to form close personal relationships, and the social benefits of recognizing close, personal relationships of same-sex couples. The second part of this article then turns to consider the manner in which same-sex relationships should be recognized. Four models are identified: a “Partial Rights” model; a “Civil Partnerships” model; a “Marriage Equality” model, and a “Diversity of Relationships” model. Reasons for and against these particular models will be examined. In the conclusion, it shall be argued that the choice of model that has been adopted can be seen to depend on a number of factors: the manner in which equality is conceived in that society; the understanding of same-sex relationships therein, and the religious and cultural opposition to same-sex relationships in that society. The models are also not states of affairs that are fixed for all time and many countries have progressed from less extensive forms of recognition to wider recognition over time. Ultimately, it shall be argued that the rationales underlying the recognition of close personal relationships in the law support the “Marriage Equality” model or the “Diversity of Relationships” model. This article thus seeks to provide an understanding of the rationales and models for recognizing same-sex relationships that have been adopted around the world: Its focus is thus comparative but may, in this way, be useful to lawmakers and advocates for legal reform in this area in China and other jurisdictions around the world.     

国家治理现代化视阈下的法律、道德与组织规范关系

国家治理现代化须以系统完备、科学规范、运行有效的规范体系为基础。而法律、道德和"组织规范"共同构成现代社会的规范体系。因而,高度重视"组织规范"并正确处理好它与法律道德的关系,就显得十分重要。"组织规范"具有民间性、自主和自治性,有权制定并实施"组织规范",约束组织本身及其成员的相关行为。这些"组织规范"上承法律下接道德,但又不是照抄照搬,而是依"法无禁止即可为"原则独立存在。在中国继续深化改革和努力实现国家治理现代化的背景下,有必要重新认识三大基础规范的关系,从而有效发挥"组织规范"的作用,构建良好社会秩序。     

Bilateral Investment Treaties,Credible Commitment,and the Rule of (International) Law: Do BITs Promote Foreign Direct Investment?

A long line of research, beginning with Macaulay's (1963) well‐known study of “Non‐Contractual Relations in Business,” suggests that the formal trappings of domestic law often have effects on private behavior that are, at best, “indirect, subtle, and ambiguous” ( Macaulay 1984 :155). Law and society scholars have spent somewhat less time exploring whether international law's effects on behavior are similarly attenuated. In this article I examine whether foreign investors take the presence of strong formal international legal protections into account when deciding where to invest. I focus on whether the presence of bilateral investment treaties, or BITs, meaningfully influences investment decisions. I present results from a statistical analysis that examines whether the formally strongest BITs—those that guarantee investors access to international arbitration to enforce investors' international legal rights—are associated with greater investment flows. I find no clear link between treaty protections and investment, a finding consistent with past law and society research but in tension with claims common in the BIT literature that the treaties should have dramatic effects on investor behavior.     

Fear of the Disability Con: Perceptions of Fraud and Special Rights Discourse

This article presents a new framework for analyzing the development and implementation of disability law: the prism of the fear of “the disability con”—popular perceptions of fraud and fakery. We all encounter disability rights and accommodations in everyday life. However, people with disabilities pay a price for the legal recognition of their rights. People who park in disabled parking spots, use service dogs, move to the front of lines, receive Social Security benefits, or request academic accommodations are often viewed as faking disabilities and abusing the law. This disability con stereotype thus serves as an important invisible barrier preventing Americans with disabilities from fully taking part in society, as it not only undermines the public legitimacy of rights but also restricts the design and implementation of the legal regime illustrating those. Nevertheless, this moral panic around disability con in American society and its manifestations has yet to be studied in a systematic‐empirical way, nor has it been addressed in sociolegal scholarship. Using a mixed‐methods approach composed of an original nationally representative survey along with in‐depth interviews, this article fills this gap. The data suggest that the stereotype of disability con applies to multiple disability rights across venues and contexts; that nearly 60% of Americans with disabilities feel that others question their disability; that the stereotype of disability con extends to visible disabilities and to less apparent ones; and that, counterintuitively, the people most suspicious are nondisabled individuals with a personal connection to a disabled person and disabled people who experience suspicion themselves. Based on the richer understanding of the sociolegal phenomenon, this article suggests strategies to increase trust and reduce suspicion of the disability con.     

The Ethics of Care,Dependence, and Disability*

According to the most important theories of justice, personal dignity is closely related to independence, and the care that people with disabilities receive is seen as a way for them to achieve the greatest possible autonomy. However, human beings are naturally subject to periods of dependency, and people without disabilities are only “temporarily abled.” Instead of seeing assistance as a limitation, we consider it to be a resource at the basis of a vision of society that is able to account for inevitable dependency relationships between “unequals” ensuring a fulfilling life both for the carer and the cared for. **     

“Critical Legal Histories Revisited”: A Response

The author responds to comments reappraising “Critical Legal Histories” (CLH) (1984). CLH critiqued “evolutionary functionalism,” the idea that law is a functional response to a typical modernizing process. CLH argued that “society” was partly constituted of legal elements and that law was too indeterminate to have reliably regular functional effects. CLH has been misinterpreted as calling for a return to internal histories of “mandarin” doctrine: all it said was that some doctrinal histories were valuable, without privileging them. This response clarifies that the relations of law to society and social change, and of high‐level official law to everyday local law are distinct issues. CLH is mostly moot today, since social‐legal historians have incorporated its insight that legal concepts are embedded in everyday social practice. But other fields have revived deterministic Whiggish accounts of progressive development and of law functional to it—to which CLH's critique still seems relevant.     

On the Rights Protection of Vulnerable Groups Under the Prevention and Control of a Public health Crisis: A Literature Review and Perspective for Future Directions

The legal system for prevention and control of a public health crisis rests on two pillars: human rights protection and good governance. This duality is well illustrated by substantively equal treatment of vulnerable groups in a pandemic from the perspectives of public service, social inclusion, accessible environment, gender equality, and right to health. A review of literature on this topic shows that current research needs to address the gap between “life supremacy” and “equal protection” in the area of human rights protection, and the gap between “putting people first” and “strict control at the grassroots level” in the area of good governance. The research should employ intersectional methodology to highlight the rights logic of the socialist legal system and the key role of the Communist Party of China’s leadership in balancing individual versus community rights, enhancing the governance capability for participation by multiple social agents, ensuring equal protection for disadvantaged groups, promoting inclusive and sustainable development, and realizing the common prosperity of all the people.     

Constructing Legal Order in an Intelligent Society

Legal order originated in a land-centered agricultural society, having now gone through a market-centered industrial society and a network-centered information society. With the rise of the intelligent society, it is transforming into an algorithmcentered legal order of an intelligent society. The “digital” “networking” “intelligent” revolution brought by the intelligent technologies including big data, cloud computing, the Internet, blockchain, and artificial intelligence (AI), has been causing critical challenges to the current legal order, and has generated powerful momentum for construction of fresh legal order featuring scientificness, people centeredness, justice, inclusiveness and co-governance. Construction of such a new jurisprudential legal order to solve this intelligent society’s “governance deficit” is an urgent task. There is a need to set up a new foundation on which an intelligent society can build steady and lasting progress.     

民法诚信原则与劳动法适用之博弈论纲——以“奋斗者协议”和“自愿弃保”为例

"奋斗者协议"与"自愿弃保"案件背后隐含的法理可简概为民法诚信原则与劳动法适用问题。实践中的误读和误判、《民法典》缺失劳动权(益)之基本民事权利设置、共享经济下新型劳动用工和疫情与后疫情时代之多重叠加效应,导致了劳动法之"衰"与"殇"。民法诚信原则同样适用劳动法含社会保障法,所谓劳动法不能适用该原则或者民法思维模式都是不严谨之"伪"命题。劳动法适用诚信原则应当考量其特殊性,惩戒权适用时,应当遵循比例原则和有利原则,并不得涉及劳动者非职业行为即私人行为和排除社会保障权。任何排除或剥夺劳动者社会保障权的约定或规章都是无效的。后劳动合同义务适用诚信原则不能"选择性""遗漏"抗辩权,如果当事人依法行使抗辩权,则不能裁定其违反了诚信原则,否则就是"伪"民法思维模式。实习关系属于特殊的劳动关系,在实习法律规范严重缺失下,用具有弥补法律不足之价值与功能的诚信原则治理"虚假实习"完全必要而且可行。     

Why Should Justice Be Seen to Be Done?

A well-known maxim instructs that justice should be seen to be done. When “seen” is understood in the sense of “observed”, the maxim is easily defended: open court proceedings protect against arbitrary and partial decisions. However, when “seen” is understood in the sense of “seem,” the maxim is more puzzling, since it is not obvious why courts should concern themselves with people's perceptions that justice has been done. This article addresses this issue, with a particular focus on the social and other benefits that result when judges observe procedures that are widely regarded as fair, especially in criminal trials. The article draws on empirical studies in social psychology that show that when legal authorities treat people in ways that accord with “lay” procedural expectations, they are more likely to view the authorities as legitimate, to cooperate with them, and to obey the law out of an internalized sense of obligation. The article explores the moral significance of these empirical findings, arguing that it would be superficial to see them as a recipe for social stability. The deeper truth conveyed by the empirical research is that relating to people in ways that are widely perceived to be fair is a way for authorities to engage people's moral sentiments and to enliven their virtuous capacity to put aside considerations of self-interest so as to do what is right. This dynamic provides a sound moral foundation for courts to concern themselves with perceptions of justice.     

儒家孝义思想对传统中国国家司法主义的影响——以“复仇”制度为论域的思考

“复仇”制度作为宗法伦理社会的伴生物,孝义是其得以产生并持续存在的精神基础。离开了“孝”,“复仇”制度便不可能产生和长期存在下去。在对“复仇”的态度上,各朝代的统治者从一定程度的肯定到逐步的限制,到最后的明令禁止“复仇”。其态度的变化反映了儒家孝义思想与传统中国国家司法主义之间矛盾的日益凸显。虽然“复仇”制度在国家司法主义的挤压下活动的空间大大的萎缩,但对“复仇”制度禁而不止的现象却与封建社会相始终。在法治现代化进程中,破除“人情大过国法”的观念,除了在理论上进行宣传“法律至上”的观念,在全社会树立法律意识以外,更为根本的是加速我国社会从传统的农业社会向以市场经济为特征的工业社会的转型。     

直面全球化的主体性中国——谈“中国法学的主体性建构”

直面全球化,中国法学首要的问题便是对“全球化问题”本身问题化而非将之视为当然的事实与前设。经由对“全球化问题”的理论建构中国法学才能进一步洞见到全球化的深层内核以及其背后的话语争夺、建构与视角转换问题,才能对作为特定时空的“中国”在全球化下所面对的问题的复杂性与多样性有更清晰的认知。本着这种问题化的理路,经由把“世界结构”作为重新定义“中国”、建构“中国”的历史性条件,中国法学就建构起了一种“关系性视角”与“共时性视角”,通过视角的建构与转换,中国法学才能够洞察“世界结构”对中国的双重强制性并在建构“主体性中国”的过程中据以建构起中国自己的法律理想图景。同时这种“主体性中国”的建构本身就是一种开放的进程。它既要对既有的“世界结构”本身的正当性保持批判与反思,更要对地方性中国对“世界结构”本身的意义与贡献充满想象。“主体性中国”的建构既是直面全球化的中国法学所秉持的一种“中国观”,更是一种“世界观”。     

PROMOTING THE PROCEDURAL JUSTICE IN CHINA

Maintaining social justice is the fundamental goal of legal systems. In Chinese, the compositions of characters have symbolic meanings, and the word “law” has the meaning of “as even as water” and “getting rid of unevenness.” It is true that people have different understandings as to the meaning of justice under different social conditions and at different times in history. However, regardless of time and place, justice has been the goal that is pursued in judicial activities.     

关于性别医疗变更行为的法律思考

随着社会经济和医疗技术的飞速发展,性别变更医疗行为一方面给予了个人选择自己性别的权利的可能,另一方面也给社会带来了诸如性别证明、婚姻、亲属关系、就业、社会福利等一系列法律问题。目前,我国法律对变性手术实施的对象、法律条件、法律程序等缺乏明确的法律规定,如何让“变性”、法律、社会三者相互协调,既保证公民选择自己性别的权利,又保障整个社会的协调发展以达到个人与社会的双赢,是一个值得研究的问题。我国可以借鉴在考察外国相关立法,从性别变更医疗行为的范围、条件和程序诸方面进行规范。     

关于我国残疾人福利法律制度构建之思考

构建残疾人福利法律制度是残疾人权益保障事业的重要一环,目前我国残疾人福利保障的立法体系仍未建立,现有相关法律制度对各类残疾人福利的保障有欠平等,国家责任原则未得到充分体现。今后,应科学构建残疾人福利法律制度体系,明确保障残疾人福利权理念和维护残疾人的尊严之理念,贯彻残疾人福利保障的国家责任原则。     

IN AND OUT OF HARM'S WAY: VIOLENT VICTIMIZATION AND THE SOCIAL CAPITAL OF FICTIVE STREET FAMILIES*

Homeless youth establish a variety of relationships with people they meet on the street. These associations generate different levels of the intangible resources of trust, commitment, and reciprocity that contribute to a person's social capital. We argue that the relationships homeless youth describe as “street families” resemble the fictive kin common among people who have limited resources, and that these relationships are a greater source of social capital than are other associations. Social capital may improve access to many valued outcomes, including protections. Regression analyses of violent victimization support our argument, demonstrating that fictive street families keep youth out of harm's way more than do other street associations.     

功能分化社会的“去分化”?——权力生产性与权力媒介性的理论冲突及其消解

在功能分化的现代社会中,以卢曼为代表的权力媒介观和以福柯为典型的权力生产观形成了针锋相对的价值立场。在系统理论看来,权力作为政治系统“象征性的普遍化沟通媒介”,维系着功能分化的社会结构,所以权力的媒介性具有自我限制的意义。但是,福柯以权力驱逐法律运作、生产知识话语和控制性实践为例,揭示了权力的生产性对社会的全面宰制和“去分化”的倾向。为了消解权力生产性所带来的“去分化”的危险,应当将权力领域限缩于政治系统,以“去主体化”的立场和“沟通”的衔接性理解权力的运作逻辑,并通过作为结构耦合的宪法与基本权利,既实现由权力到法的符码转译,同时又确保社会子系统内部的强制性力量关系具有正当性与合法性。     

人民法院改革取向的审视与思考

20世纪90年代以来的人民法院改革,总体上潜含着对标形式主义法治司法模式的取向,其目标可概括为“让司法更像司法”。这种由内向视角导引的改革,对塑造我国司法的基础形态、完善司法的基本要件具有积极意义,但也在一定程度上造成了司法与社会需求的疏离,使司法改革的红利难以充分转化为社会的实际获得。在还原主义立场下回溯司法的基源性理论,司法是一种制度建构的产物、一种公共产品,司法应当尊重“消费者体验”。着眼于外向视角,提升司法能力亦应成为法院改革的取向之一。在今后继续深化推进司法责任制改革的过程中,应以影响司法能力的基本要素作为改革的着眼点,通过司法能力的提升实现司法的社会功能,满足和实现社会对司法的需求,以“让司法更能司法”。     

对依法治国进程中的法治与德治的反思

我国社会的现代化进程属后发外生型进程,相对于西方的早发内生型现代化,它表现为人为的强劲推进力,而伴随这一历史性变迁的,就是中国急剧的社会结构转型——由乡土社会向市民社会的转化。其间,德治秩序的解崩与法治秩序的构建成为社会发展的必然趋势。如何在依法治国进程中重新定位法治与德治的关系,就成为一个时代性的话题。本文通过对法治与德治给予应然的关切和实然的解析,并由此阐明笔者对“依法治国”内涵的理解。