Maintaining neutrality in the Minister's office

How do non-partisan advisors in Ministers’ offices maintain political neutrality while immersed in a highly politicised environment? Private Secretaries are ubiquitous non-partisan public service representatives in the political environment of Ministers’ offices. There has been significant research undertaken the role of political advisors in Ministers’ offices, yet the contribution of these non-partisan advisors has not yet been described in academic literature. The risk of Private Secretaries being overly responsive to politicians and undertaking political tasks rather than maintaining neutrality is ever present. Further, they must actively manage the risk of free and frank advice being obstructed by political advisors. This article presents views about political neutrality gleaned from interviews with Private Secretaries who have worked in Ministers’ offices in New Zealand during the period of 1997–2018. It presents new insights into the tensions within a key setting of the core executive.     

法官庭外调查权的理解与适用

刑事诉讼法赋予了法官庭外调查权,但由于法律规定的过于笼统,使人们对法官庭外调查权的理解和适用产生了分歧。本文在贯彻法官中立原则和有利于被告人原则的前提下,对法官庭外调查权进行定位并从程序上对该项权利进行完善,从而防止审判权的异化并维护司法公正。     

Toleration,neutrality, and freedom: a reply

ABSTRACT

In defending toleration against its many critics, Respecting Toleration has both conceptual and normative aims. Conceptually, I defend and explain the coherence of political toleration. This involves, in part, highlighting a distinction between two forms of toleration; one of which always involves objection, and one which does not. Normatively, I defend a particular understanding of toleration as the best way of accommodating contemporary diversity. In brief, the state should be guided by an active ideal of neutrality, and citizens must at minimum engage in forbearance tolerance with each others’ differences. In this paper, I respond to four main lines of criticism. The first is that my understanding of toleration – in which objection is not always necessary – is too broad, and that my non-moralised understanding of forbearance tolerance requires additional context. Second, my discussion of neutrality runs together the distinction between an active/passive state with a large/small state; wrongly fails to distinguish between mere preferences and deeply held beliefs; and is really a concern about equality. Third, my freedom-based justification for toleration is too limited; and may, in fact, enable recognition rather than resist it. Fourth, my rejection of inter-citizen respect for difference is too quick.     

论民事诉讼中法院调查取证制度之完善-基于实证分析与比较法的考察

法院调查取证制度是我国民事诉讼程序的重要组成部分，跟程序公正、诉讼效率、证据能力和司法资源分配有密不可分的联系。在实证调研的基础上，分析我国法院调查取证制度存在的主要问题。通过对西方主要法治国家立法经验的分析，结合我国现实的政治经济文化环境和调查取证制度的发展规律和运行趋势，提出健全、完善该制度的进路。     

Toleration,neutrality, and exemption

ABSTRACT

I focus on some controversial features of Peter Balint’s stimulating and provocative reassessment of the place of toleration in contemporary diverse societies. First, I question his argument that we must enlarge the concept of toleration to include indifference and approval if toleration is to be compatible with state neutrality. Secondly, I suggest that his idea of active neutrality of intent risks encountering the same difficulties as neutrality of outcome, although these will be mitigated the more the state’s neutrality takes a ‘hands-off’ form. Thirdly, while accepting his claim that exemptions depart from neutrality insofar as they attribute a significance to religious and conscientious convictions that they deny to mere preferences, I argue that that departure is not arbitrary and remains within the spirit of neutrality of intent.     

论心理咨询中的价值中立和价值干预

西方的“价值中立”理论为我国的心理咨询提供了更为丰富的思维创新空间,但如何科学认识和吸纳这些舶来的思想精髓,是国内学术界一直讨论的重点话题。该项研究将从心理咨询宏观的运行规律,到心理咨询的本土化、适用性角度,认真探讨“价值中立”与中国本土心理咨询实践的相悖性、冲突性,并以此入手认真解析心理咨询中进行价值干预的必要性和具体运行原则。     

Justice and the neutral state: A postmodern,feminist critique of lehning's account of justice

In this journal, Lehning (1990) defended the liberal view of political justice, arguing on behalf of a comprehensive principle of state neutrality as the linchpin of justice. By failing to deal with the postmodern challenge to the Enlightenment-liberalist conception of neutrality and by thoroughly ignoring the feminist understanding in which neutrality actually conceals a masculinist bias, Lehning's analysis is seriously undermined with respect to its possibility for understanding, let alone for accomplishing political justice.     

PRO SE DIVORCE LITIGANTS

With the increased number of divorce litigants appearing pro se in the past century, trial court judges and court personnel are forced to deal with their conflicting obligations with more frequency. It is virtually impossible for a trial court judge to ensure all litigants have a fair and meaningful trial without compromising their neutrality. Likewise, court personnel are allowed to give out legal information but not legal advice, with the definition of legal information and advice not neatly packaged into two separate and distinct categories. Consequently, changes must be made. This note suggests various solutions that can be imposed to either reevaluate the role of trial court judges and court personnel so that they no longer have conflicting obligations and are able to accommodate the needs of the pro se litigants or implement services that can provide pro se litigants with other avenues of obtaining information and assistance.     

Digital Britain interim report: A step in the right direction?

The Digital Britain interim report was published on 29 January 2009 by the DCMS and BERR with the final report being due out in June. The Report divides itself into four areas for ‘action’; namely Digital Networks, Digital Content, Universal Connectivity and Equipping Everyone to Benefit from Digital Britain. The level of action proposed in each case varies widely and the Report has come under criticism for delivering little in the way of concrete promises or clearly defined strategy. This article summarises and analyses a number of the key purported actions from the Report in order to consider whether it is indeed an appropriate step towards an action plan that would secure the Britain's place at the forefront of the new media age.     

司法是人权保障的最佳方式

司法是人权保障的最佳方式。一方面 ,它是由权利本身的缺陷所决定 ;侵权是必然发生的 ,因此救济权利成为必要。权利救济的最佳方式是司法救济。另一方面 ,它是由司法的特性所决定 ;司法具有中立性 ,司法过程是建立在正当程序基础之上的 ,以及司法判决是由合格的法庭和法官作出的。