单位犯罪主体浅论——以“犯罪主体”与“刑事责任主体”为视角

我国刑法理论对“单位犯罪主体”、“刑事责任主体”等问题缺乏相应的理论研讨,这也导致了司法实践中适用的诸多问题。有鉴于此,笔者提出“一个犯罪主体、两个刑事责任主体”的大胆观点,并建议批判地吸收美国公司犯罪中的“上级责任原则”,以增强对我国立法尤其是司法的指导作用。     

试论我国产品责任的归责原则

产品责任是经济法的重要组成部分,而归责原则又是产品责任的核心问题。对我国关于产品责任归责原则诸多观点进行分析,我国产品责任的归责原则只能适用严格责任。     

试论中国产品质量的归责原则

我国法学 (学术 )界对中国产品质量的归责问题有几种不同的观点 :第一种是“过失责任说” ;第二种是“过错推定说” ;第三种是“视为有过错说” ;第四种是“严格责任说”或“无过错责任说” ;第五种是“综合责任说”。第五种观点既总结了以往法学界在产品责任归责上的研究成果 ,又结合了《产品质量法》的规定 ,基本上反映了我国产品责任的法律现状。然而我国目前的《产品质量法》处罚仍偏轻。加重处罚 ,提高法律的可操作性是进一步完善《产品责任法》或《产品质量法》的两个重要方面     

对刑法"不得假释"之规定(81条第二款)的商榷

限制假释与世界行刑现代化方向不吻合。对假释在实践中存在的问题应具体分析,但不能因噎废食。我国限制假释的理论依据值得商榷,事实表明:限制假释不利于调动在监服刑犯的改造积极性,不利于他们的重新社会化过程,与监狱法中对罪犯实行惩罚与改造相结合的原则不符;同时,在维护社会的稳定以及体现法律的公正、衔接等方面并非是一个较好的选择。所以,建议对该刑法条款进行修改,并通过对我国假释管理体制的完善,逐步扩大对假释的适用。     

律师刑事责任豁免权必要性刍议

目前 ,我国律师在刑事执业中困难重重 ,不利于对犯罪嫌疑人、被告人合法权益的保护 ,最主要的原因是律师在刑事执业中风险太大。赋予律师在刑事诉讼中豁免权有利于实现设立律师制度的目的 ,维护弱者权利 ,维护最基本人权 ,同时也是跟国际相接轨的现实需要。     

Divorcing Responsibly

In this article I argue that Part II of the Family LawAct 1996 gives expression to a new form ofresponsibility. I begin by suggesting thatresponsible behaviour has shifted from prohibiting orrequiring particular actions: we now exhibitresponsibility by our attitude towards our actions. I then examine where this new conception ofresponsibility has come from. Through an examinationof the work of post-liberal theorists, principallyMichael Sandel, I argue that a changing view ofpersonhood within post-liberal theory has led to aquestioning of the possibility of choice, and that theabsence of choice necessitates a shift in thedefinition of responsible behaviour. If we are createdby our decisions then we cannot be held to account forour decisions, but only for the care we have takenover them. Responsibility is therefore measured notby our level of self-control but by our level ofself-awareness. Finally I examine the consequences ofthis shift in the meaning of responsibility. Withinthis framework autonomy is illusory thereforedecisions do not need to be respected. This explainswhy the implementation of Part II of the Family LawAct 1996 has been called into question. Within thisframework responsibility is relative therefore itextends indefinitely. This enables the Family Law Actto be uniquely intrusive and judgmental: everydivorcing couple, on being held up to scrutiny, isfound lacking.     

“两国论”的社会基础与台湾政情

“两国论”不但有特殊的背景,而且有相当的社会基础,值得忧虑和警惕。但是,台湾的安全与稳定,台湾民众的福祉皆系于坚持“一个中国”的基本原则:因此,虽有人妄言修宪定国,却未敢冒险付诸行动;各“总统”候选人在竞选白热化之际打“两岸关系”牌,恰恰说明了台湾民众对“两国论”没有信心。     

Harm,Consent and the Limits of Privacy

Within the context of U.K. law, the right to respect for private life, articulated in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and acknowledged more opaquely in domestic legislation and case law, is one whose scope is unclear. Nowhere is this brought into sharper relief than in cases where conduct which manifests a person’s sexual identity, or concerns her intimate relations with others, is prima facie criminal. In this essay I attempt, through a discussion of cases in which injury is caused in the context of relationships experienced inter-subjectively as private, to explore the contexts in which the law is prepared to legitimate that inter-subjective experience, and where it is not. Using cases in which injury has been caused purposively (in S/M sex), and incidentally (through the reckless transmission of HIV during sexual intercourse), the essay argues that the law is prepared to respect the right to respect for private life only in so far as the private life concerned is one which reinforces traditional gender roles and relationship types; in short, a life that one would be prepared to live publicly.     

“直接适用的法”与合同准据法的确定

“直接适用的法”是指无须援引法院地冲突规则而必须直接适用于某种涉外民商事关系的强制性法律规范。它在涉外合同准据法的确定中的地位有不同观点 ,本文对此进行了探讨 ,并分析了“直接适用的法”与具体的涉外合同法律适用原则的关系 ,认为“直接适用的法”在适用于涉外合同关系时只应作为对一般冲突规范的限制 ,而不是确定合同准据法的首要原则。     

完善我国产品责任立法的几点建议

产品质量和产品责任问题已成为非常突出的社会问题,有必要借鉴他国产品责任立法,扩大"产品"的范围,明确产品"缺陷"的定义,确立严格责任原则,增设惩罚性赔偿制度,扩大产品责任义务主体的范围,扩大保护对象的范围,不断完善我国产品责任立法。