Legitimacy,self-determination,and conditional cooperators

ABSTRACT

This article critically examines the account of collective self-determination and state legitimacy developed by Stilz in her book. Central to this account is the idea that for a state to be legitimate it must reflect the shared will of the people over which it governs. I argue that the normative taxonomy Stilz employs to develop this criterion of legitimacy ignores the possibility of conditional cooperators: groups who are alienated from society due to the injustices they experience but are willing to affirm their participation in state institutions if these injustices are rectified. I then demonstrate that since there are no grounds for discounting the dissent of conditional cooperators, their presence significantly increases the threshold for state legitimacy that follows from Stilz’s theory. As a result, Stilz is forced to abandon her claim that basically just states generally enjoy a qualified ‘right to do wrong’.     

生物多样性预防公益诉讼的制度逻辑及实现路径

随着当今社会风险的不断加剧、不可逆转损害后果的频繁出现,生物多样性保护不应局限于事后的补救性救济,而应当积极拓展其预防功能,将隐患消弭于尚未发生之际是生物多样性预防公益诉讼的应有之义。就现行司法救济体系而言,尚存在法源理论上的不相妥协、立法维度上的事后救济为主、司法实践中的固守谨慎等鲜明特征。因此,应当在风险预防原则与比例原则的引导下,加快推进生物多样性专门立法、明确“重大风险”判断基准、完善生物多样性多元保障体系、打造查、审、执相互贯通的全链条式体系。     

通信权的宪法释义与审查框架--兼与杜强强、王锴、秦小建教授商榷

在"法院调取通话记录""交警查手机"等实践争议引导下,学者们借助基本权利限制的"保护范围—限制—限制的合宪性论证"的审查框架,推进了通信权的宪法释义。但将通话记录排除出通信权的保护范围,并不能有效解决实践难题,且因为过早窄化保护范围而会影响基本权利的保护效果。诉诸隐私权或者个人信息权的方案亦难以成立。应认识到《宪法》第40条存在因制宪者预见不足而产生的宪法漏洞。如果将"检查通信"理解为"示例性规定",则《宪法》第40条容有对通信权限制的其他可能性。在"通信内容"和"非内容的通信信息"分层构造下,可以建立起既能回应生活事实和实践争议,又能落实宪法严格保护目标的教义学体系和审查框架。基本权利个论的研究,有助于反思基本权利保护范围的"宽界定"或"窄界定",以及法律保留体系的普适性等基本权利总论问题。     

劳动者维权异常名录:价值考量与制度纠偏

为规制职场“碰瓷”式维权行为,一些地方建立了劳动者维权异常名录机制。从概念来看,“维权异常”并非严格意义上之法律术语,它与虚假诉讼、恶意诉讼存在交叉。该机制虽能在一定程度上遏制“职场碰瓷”、虚假诉讼等行为的发生,缓和仲裁机关、法院的压力,并有助于社会信用体系建设,但维权异常的认定及名录发布行为在法律属性上存疑,相关的惩戒措施存在损害劳动者提起争议处理权、就业权之隐忧,更不利于劳动者的个人信息保护与企业的自律合规管理。因此,制度未来改进应确立适格的权力主体,并引入主观目的要素综合判断劳动者是否构成维权异常,预采取的惩戒手段要符合比例原则之要求。此外,亦要改进相关配套制度,如注重劳动争议纠纷的源头治理,建立健全劳动仲裁与诉讼的收费制度。     

环保督察与空气质量改善:立足城市情境的效应异质性分析

作为生态环境保护领域的一项重大制度创新,中央环保督察已经成为党和政府推动生态文明建设的重要政策工具。然而,对于中央环保督察能否改善空气质量,尤其是其效果的可持续性,尚存在诸多争议。立足于匹配后的地级市数据评估中央环保督察对空气质量改善的平均效应,结果表明中央环保督察尽管在短期内显著改善了空气质量,其长期效应并不显著。然而,借助基于模型的递归分解法和随机森林法进一步发现:中央环保督察的长期效应存在显著的情境差异性:中央环保督察对于空气污染较重的城市具有长期改善效应,且东部城市尤为明显;一个城市的经济发展水平越高,中央环保督察效应越具有长效性;政府规模和财政自主性对中央环保督察效应起到截然相反的调节作用:前者的扩张会削弱长期效应,而后者的提升则会强化长期效应。揭示城市情境对督察效应的调节作用,有助于深化学界对中央环保督察长效性的条件认识,也为进一步完善该制度、提升其效能提供了重要的思路。     

Make Hegel great again: on Hegel’s epistemological contribution to critical terrorism studies

ABSTRACT

Despite the contribution of Foucaultian inspired approaches to Critical Terrorism Studies, this article invites us to consider Hegel’s epistemological insights. Foucault’s power-knowledge nexus is an invaluable intellectual tool which reveals how terrorism can be a “social fact”, yet it rests on a genealogical account of history and a passive notion of subjectivity determined by power (regimes). Hegelian philosophy maintains some of the benefits met in Foucault’s approach (sociality and contingency of knowledge) while providing a richer epistemological account. This article introduces Hegel’s epistemological insights to: i) challenge the portrayal of terrorism as a major external threat against the western liberal democratic states in the vein of “New Terrorism” or the “Clash of Civilizations”; and ii) domestically explore how the concept of liberal democratic rights, equality, freedom affect the interpretation of counter-terrorist bills, the threat perception of terrorism and domestic polarisation. Hegel’s insights critically interrogate the notions of “liberal rights”, “equality” and “freedom”, revealing how their ambiguous definition accommodates inherent contradictions which can fuel a controversial interpretation of counter-terrorist bills, leading to domestic polarisation and (reciprocal) radicalisation. Therefore, Hegel’s epistemological insights reveal how the defective definition of human rights, equality and liberty can amplify the effects of Terrorism and radicalisation.     

美好生活的社会保护水准:社会政策体系中基本生活需要标准的建构

基本生活需要保障是我国不断满足人民美好生活需要的基础。构建基本生活需要标准,关键在于瞄准相对贫困目标、构建福利认证标准和消除社会排斥状态。基于人类需要理论和国外基本需要战略等相关研究,应以民生保障、适度普惠、多维满足和防止伤害等为具体目标,建构起具有中国特色的基本生活需要标准。这一标准分为最低标准和适当标准两个层次,包括收入、医疗、教育、住房和照料五个维度的货币指标和非货币指标。以"美好生活"为核心的新时代社会政策体系要在全面性与协调性、主动性与精准性、适度性与发展性三个方向着力保障人民基本生活需要,从消除绝对贫困走向解决相对贫困。     

Victim-warriors and iconic heroines: photographs of female combatants in Aceh,Indonesia

Analyzing photos and narratives of the “widows’ battalion” in Aceh, Indonesia that appeared in international and local print media between 2000 and 2002, this article traces how images of female combatants initially provided evidence of a uniformed, armed ethno-nationalist movement motivated by past state violence and linked to historical legends of women involved in armed resistance to colonialism. Subsequently, the heroines were recast as immoral young women pursuing inappropriate sexual relationships with the occupying military. The problems of intelligence gathering, double agents, and the indeterminate zone of overlap in which male soldiers collaborated in the past were rewritten as a problem of sexual or intimate relations that violated religious and cultural norms. In Aceh, the affective power and complexity of women’s positioning as both victim and combatant is fueled by the invocation of the iconic heroines of the anticolonial resistance and ideas about international human rights. Images and narration of the widows’ battalion appear to champion female combatants past and present, but in fact, contribute to the consolidation of the power of male commanders and combatants in the resistance movement. Analyses of human rights photography must consider the affective power of images beyond engaging the empathy of distant spectators to consider their role in conflict dynamics.     

互联网金融视域下的类资产证券化:交易模式、金融异化与监管逻辑

为了规避监管或监管套利,互联网金融的类资产证券化创设了新的交易模式与法律结构:债权拆分流转、信托受益权拆分流转和资产收益权拆分流转。这突破传统的法律权利类型与法律边界,改变了传统的公募、私募监管逻辑,相关法律规制面临冲击和重构。对实质开展互联网资管业务的非金融类机构监管等领域的法律滞后与模糊,造成事实上的监管真空,引发金融乱象。金融监管应坚持实质重于形式的监管原则,强化穿透式监管,厘清互联网金融创新的法律边界,推进央地监管分工的法治化、体系化,消除监管空白,避免泛化式、运动式监管。     

我国《反不正当竞争法》中的消费者权益保护问题探讨

维护自由公平的竞争秩序与保护消费者权益实质是一个问题的两个方面。我国《反不正当竞争法》将消费者权益保护作为立法目标之一,并将消费者合法权益是否受损作为不正当竞争行为的认定标准之一,但由于消费者概念不明确,又缺乏直接的救济手段,该法的立法与实践出现了落差。不正当竞争行为认定中的消费者标准不宜套用《消费者权益保护法》中的消费者概念,同时在司法救济上,应赋予消费者以消费者组织的名义进行团体诉讼的有限诉权。只有这样才更能体现反不正当竞争法的立法宗旨。