新时代推进全球治理法治化的中国方案

国际法治是全球治理在国际法规、制度层面的重要方法和路径,推动国际法治建设对完善国际秩序和全球治理体系的意义重大。党的十八大以来,以习近平同志为核心的党中央先后提出了一系列国际法治建设的新理念,致力于为不断解决全球性问题、完善全球治理体系贡献中国智慧和中国方案。在理论层面,中国主张强调以《联合国宪章》、和平共处五项原则等公认的国际法规为准则,倡导创设民主、科学、公正的国际良法,统筹推动国内法治与国际法治、国际硬法与国际软法的共同发展,为实现全球良法善治提供方向指引。在实践层面,中国不断提升推进国际法治建设的能力和水平,不仅在国际立法方面,而且在解决国际争端、国际人权保护和共建“一带一路”等领域都积极贡献自己的力量,推动了国际法治体系的完善和法治合作机制的创新,成为国际法治建设和全球治理变革的积极参与者和推动者。习近平关于国际法治立场观点的提出,构成国际法治建设中国方案的主要内容,其对于中国提升解决国际问题和维护国家利益的能力、促进国际秩序和全球治理体系的民主化发展、推动构建人类命运共同体,具有深远影响。     

知识产权国际博弈与中国话语的价值取向

美国在知识产权全球治理中呈现出一味强化权利保护的价值倾向。受其影响,知识产权保护的国际规则呈现不断强化之势。但是,美国在国内法中存在对知识产权强化保护的平衡机制,有别于其对外片面输出强化保护规则。一味强化保护的知识产权制度会走向偏颇。我国在知识产权国际博弈和对话中需要提出自己的话语和话语体系,其前提是明确本国话语的价值取向。相比历史、文化取向而言,话语构造的价值取向路径具有优越性。在国际博弈中,我国宜秉持并提倡知识产权法的二元价值取向。二元价值取向契合知识产权法基本原理,体现了世界共同价值,其核心作用在于纠偏,我国应坚持和发扬这一价值取向。     

论新兴权利的一般理论

新兴权利不同于新型权利。它是法定权利的对称,是法定权利之外的、实存的社会权利,但与此同时,它是与法定权利息息相关的权利。新兴权利的生成根据,既可能出于法律遗漏,也可能是出自法律排斥,更可能出自社会关系和社会事实变迁。新兴权利的保护方式,既可能通过权利推定,也可能通过民间规范,还可能通过纠纷解决。     

“一带一路”倡议与中国企业承担人权责任策略探析

在经济全球化浪潮面临挑战和"一带一路"倡议方兴未艾的复杂国际背景下,中国企业面临发展机遇与人权相关风险的双重挑战。国际工商业与人权议程尤其是联合国《工商企业与人权:实施联合国"保护、尊重和补救"框架指导原则》蕴含着丰富的企业人权责任。我国可从政府与企业两个层面采取应对措施。在政府层面,可以制定并执行相关法律与政策;制定工作指引,建立监管体系;制定工商业与人权行动计划。在企业层面,应当把尊重人权原则纳入公司治理;主动发布人权履责报告,加强对话与合作。     

Time for a haircut: political regimes and sovereign debt restructurings

ABSTRACT

Conventional wisdom claims that reputation leads sovereign states to full debt repayment. However, defaults are recurrent, some debtor countries take a lot of time to end them, and some extract costly concessions from investors. This article argues that these differences are largely explained by the political regimes in the borrowing countries. While previous research examines whether democracies make more credible commitments, we analyze how democracies affect bargaining with foreign investors after a default occurs. Democracies, with their institutional checks, electoral uncertainty, greater transparency, and public deliberation, make swift decision-making harder, create incentives to pander and posture, and give leverage to minimize the win set of viable agreements. We test our theory on a comprehensive dataset of debt restructurings with private creditors in the period 1975–2017. The event history analysis indicates that democracies experience longer restructurings and the double-hurdle regression analysis shows that democracies obtain larger creditor losses. Further, there is interesting variation among democracies and autocracies. Our findings suggest that political regimes are crucial to explaining why cooperation fails in international debt markets.     

现代诉讼的本质:全面理性的规范沟通

纠纷的成因是交往失败,而诉讼是重新交往解决纠纷的一种方式。将诉讼置于交往视野下,诉讼的沟通性便得以显现。无论是民事、行政还是刑事诉讼,均渗透着立足言语、实现主体间沟通的理念。诉讼通过外在规范特性保证主体间的沟通顺利进行,没有建制化程序的外在保障,沟通难以成效。诉讼的内在规范性是对诉讼规范性内涵的丰富,是一种内在的交往预设程序。经过对规范价值的内在化,诉讼交往主体形成自我约束,对诉讼规则、交往预设自愿主动承受,促进共识的实现和纠纷的解决。可以说,现代诉讼克服了传统职权主义模式或者当事人主义模式的片面理性,追求客观世界、主观世界和规范世界相融通的全面理性,保障司法公正、令人信服司法,达到司法真正权威。因此,诉讼区别于其他纠纷解决机制的最大不同,在于诉讼的本质是全面理性的规范沟通。     

Legitimacy and institutional purpose

ABSTRACT

Institutions undertake a huge variety of constitutive purposes. One of the roles of legitimacy is to protect and promote an institution’s pursuit of its purpose; state legitimacy is generally understood as the right to rule, for example. When considering legitimacy beyond the state, we have to take account of how differences in purposes change legitimacy. I focus in particular on how differences in purpose matter for the stringency of the standards that an institution must meet in order to be legitimate. An important characteristic of an institution’s purpose is its deontic status, i.e. whether it is morally impermissible, merely permissible, or mandatory. Although this matters, it does so in some non-obvious ways; the mere fact of a morally impermissible purpose is not necessarily delegitimating, for example. I also consider the problem of conflicting, multiple, and contested institutional purposes, and the different theoretical roles for institutional purpose. Understanding how differences in purpose matter for an institution’s legitimacy is one part of the broader project of theorizing institutional legitimacy in the many contexts beyond the traditional context of the state.     

Peace-building Through Space-making: The Spatializing Effects of the African Union’s Peace and Security Policies

ABSTRACT

This article is discussing how the peace-building practices of the African Union have distinct ordering and space-making effects. Taking a socio-spatial perspective, it is argued that the peace and security projects through which the African Union, as a spatial entrepreneur, is addressing the scourge of ‘terrorism and violent extremism’ are geared towards (re-)establishing sovereignty that member states have lost in the past over their territories. While the African Union is favouring a spatial format that could be called ‘multiple networked regionalism’, the actual socio-spatial orders that are emerging around Africa’s transregional conflicts are far less clear cut.     

Brexit,Cabinet Norms and the Ministerial Code: Are we Living in a post-Nolan Era?

The Nolan Report will celebrate its twenty-fifth anniversary in 2020, and for most of this last quarter-century, it has provided the underlying ethical basis for public life in the United Kingdom. However, its principles are now being called into question in a number of areas, following the Conservative government’s loss of its parliamentary majority in the 2017 election, with the interests of party taking precedence over adherence to both the spirit and the codified practical implementation of some of the ultimate outcomes of Nolan, namely the Ministerial Code and the Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards. This article argues, with explicit evidence and examples, that ministerial conduct which would not have been tolerated before 2017 is now being routinely ignored in the interest of maintaining party unity in order to deliver some form of Brexit. The article concludes by asking whether Nolan norms still command consensus post-Brexit.     

Exploring the Effects of North–South and South–South Research Collaboration in Emerging Economies,the Colombian Case

International research collaboration (IRC) is associated with both positive and negative effects on the performance of research in emerging economies. While some authors claim that North–South collaborations improve scientific quality and visibility for Southern countries, others claim that it may entail the reorientation of research to comply with Northern agendas. South–South collaborations are thought to increase the focus on local affairs, therefore leading to a relatively small number of scientific international publications appearing in “high quality” journals. Research on the impact of IRC beyond publications in international journals has been neglected despite the importance of other products in knowledge creation. This research uses a broad range of scientific outputs to empirically assess such assumptions and explore the outcomes of IRC in Colombia. Results from multivariate regressions and nonparametric analyses show that, contrary to common assumptions, Colombian research teams collaborating with partners from the global South report higher scientific production, while those collaborating with Northern countries seem to contribute to local knowledge the most.