Post-9/11 counterterrorism in popular culture: the spectacle and reception of The Bourne Ultimatum and 24

This article examines the representation of counterterrorism in contemporary film and television and surveys its reception among active online audiences. Contemporary counterterrorism fiction like The Bourne Ultimatum (2007 The Bourne ultimatum. 2007. Film. Directed by Paul Greengrass. Produced by Doug Liman, Henry Morrison and Jeffrey M. Weiner. USA.  [Google Scholar]; Film. Directed by Paul Greengrass) and the TV series 24 (2001–2010; Television series. Created by Robert Cochran and Joel Surnow), present viewers with conventional hero-driven narratives wrapped in a spectacle of high-tech surveillance technologies. As counterterrorism is an inherently covert exercise, the widespread popularity of these Hollywood franchises raises questions about how the public understands the capabilities and ethics of counterterrorism. These questions are addressed through an analysis of the generic and aesthetic features of the texts along with a survey of audience responses on the Internet Movie Database (IMDb).     

刑讯逼供的法律结构原因和根本对策

客观真实论的刑事诉讼证明标准、不合理的犯罪构成结构是侦查人员采取刑讯手段逼取口供的内在动因。必须实现审判权的完全独立,并加强审判公开,确立法官在刑事诉讼中的完全主导地位,由法官对案件自由地进行实质判断和心证,才能降低证明标准,使侦查人员从对口供的极力追求中解脱出来,从根本上遏制刑讯逼供。     

试论被追诉人获得权利告知的权利——从遏制刑讯逼供的角度

获得权利告知的权利是被追诉者享有的一项重要权利,与侦查机关的告知义务共同构成了一个问题的两个方面,体现了权利制约权力的理念。本文从遏制刑讯逼供的角度,分别就该项权利的含义和内容、对遏制刑讯逼供的意义及我国立法在该项权利保障方面的不足和改进方向进行了论述。     

应确立口供相对任意性的采证规则

口供作为法定证据中的一种,在诉讼中具有真伪两面性,真实的口供有利于查禁犯罪,而虚假的口供却极易诱发冤假错案。民主法制先进的国家在对待口供问题上都确立了一系列的可采性规则,其中主要是自白的任意性规则。在我国只应确立口供的相对任意性规则,这主要是基于我国的基本国情和刑事诉讼的任务,也是基于诉讼的价值平衡决定的。确立口供相对任意性的采信规则具有一定价值,有利于发现案件真实,提高办案质量,使诉讼更加人性化。但存在影响口供相对任意性采信规则的一些因素,所以要保障口供相对任意性规则的实施。     

刑讯逼供存在的可能性及其防范--以讯问犯罪嫌疑人为视角

讯问犯罪嫌疑人是一项极为重要的侦查活动。在实践中,刑讯逼供往往成为犯罪嫌疑人接受讯问时所面临的最大风险。我国刑事诉讼应重视本国国情,立足本国的国民性,在犯罪嫌疑人讯问程序中注入一种人文精神,以人文关怀的方式获取犯罪嫌疑人的"自白"。     

刑讯逼供的成因及对策

刑讯逼供不仅侵犯人权 ,而且妨碍准确及时的打击犯罪 ,危害很大。由于种种原因 ,刑讯逼供仍大量存在 ,必须采取切实有效的措施 ,预防并减少刑讯逼供的发生。     

论人权保障与防止酷刑

酷刑与古代刑罚制度相伴而行 ,19世纪启蒙运动的发展 ,使个人权利得到尊重 ,人权保障成为现代法治的重要内容。 2 0世纪以来 ,酷刑被视为与现代法治水火不相容的罪恶。我国一贯反对和禁止酷刑并把反酷刑作为我国刑事诉讼制度设计的基本要求。但是 ,由于我国现行法律制度的不完善 ,实践中违背人权的事例时有发生。因此 ,建立一套有效防止酷刑的法律机制已迫在眉睫。     

法治视野下我国刑事审讯程序的反思与改革

刑讯逼供等非法取证行为早已为现代国家所诟病。在我国,刑讯逼供已经成了一个“不可忽视”的问题。在法治理念下审讯程序包含了无罪推定原则、嫌疑人享有反对强迫自证其罪特权和沉默权和审讯手段文明化、人道化等内容。我国应在一定程度上借鉴现代法治国家设计的正当化审讯程序,这对于正在实施“依法治国”方略的中国而言,无疑具有相当的价值。我国的审讯程序应当从确立无罪推定原则、赋予犯罪嫌疑人沉默权等方面逐步、渐进地予以改革。     

Interpersonal violence by authoritarian rulers: Saddam Hussein and Joseph Stalin compared

Why do some authoritarian rulers, such as Saddam Hussein, kill or torture other people personally, whereas others, like Joseph Stalin, delegate such violence to subordinates? Such politically motivated interpersonal violence committed by authoritarian leaders has never before been theorized. Through a comparison of Hussein and Stalin, we explain why some dictators engage in this behavior and others do not. We propose a model based on three components: the individual's prior habituation or non-habituation to violence; regime characteristics that ‘select for’ a personally violent or non-violent ruler; and, once a ruler takes power, the interaction of the first two variables. We also suggest that most communist regimes featured organizational characteristics that discouraged such violence by the leader.