Vigilante justice and informal policing in post-Euromaidan Ukraine

During and after the Euromaidan, the Ukrainian society experienced an emergence of non-state groups that combined elements of civic activism and paramilitarism. They operated independently from the state and often used extra-legal violence to restore law and order, deliver justice, and protect Ukraine from external and internal threats. Their conduct closely resembles vigilantism. This article draws on the body of criminological and sociological research on vigilantism in order to understand the diverse landscape of vigilante groups in post-Euromaidan Ukraine. It explores the complex relationship between the most representative vigilante groups, the Ukrainian government, and the political and business elites; analyzes the legal boundaries of vigilantism in Ukraine; and discusses the outcomes of vigilante justice for democratic consolidation, rule of law, and human rights. This article offers a new paradigm for theorizing popular mobilization in Ukraine and sheds light on important dimensions of the formation of an informal system of policing and justice.     

差异与成因：两大法系消极公诉权之评析——兼及我国消极公诉权之完善

消极公诉权在公诉权理论中占有极为重要的地位 ,两大法系都对之作出了积极的肯定 ,并在立法上作出了相应的规定。但是 ,两大法系对消极公诉权的规定又显示出了巨大的差异 ,这种差异是由于两大法系在国家政治哲学、法律传统、诉讼理念等方面的区别而造成的。本文分析了两者的差异 ,并对我国消极公诉权的完善提出了意见     

完善宪法程序若干问题初探

我国目前亟需完善的宪法程序为 :各级人民代表选举程序 ;修改宪法程序 ;保护公民宪法权利的宪政立法程序 ;执政党执政程序 ;违宪审查程序 ;其他国家机关对本级国家权力机关负责的程序 ;国家权力机关监督本级其他国家机关的程序。     

完善我国宪法监督制度之构想

设立宪法法院负责宪法监督工作是一种最切合实际的完善我国宪法监督制度的方案。除在中央设立宪法法院外,可在地方设立巡回宪法法院。宪法法院应当具有相对独立性。为保证宪法法院有效行使其宪法监督职能,必须赋予其事前审查权、宪法解释权等职权。宪法监督程序须由相应的主体提起。     

To Wonderland Through the Looking-glass: Conceiving a Critical Legal Argument for Contractual Justice in the South African Law of Contract †

The aim of this paper is to identify the possible substructure (looking glass/es) of a critical legal argument for contractual justice (Wonderland) in the South African law of contract. South African contract law still fails, ten years after the constitutional transformation, to reflect the constitutional ideals of freedom, equality and human dignity in an acceptable manner. I argue that this disposition places a question mark over the legitimacy of contract law and marginalizes opportunities for the social change envisaged by the Constitution. The paper explores Duncan Kennedy’s Form and Substance-argument and indicates that the reluctance to accommodate these values may be attributable to the fact that the majority of role-players position themselves on the individualism/rules side of Kennedy’s continuum – a paradigm that perceives the law of contract as a body of positivistic rules to be applied neutrally and regardless of the social or socio-economic distortions its application may generate. In an attempt to move away from this traditional approach, the privileged paradigm is criticised. A typical CLS-approach is followed which employs sociology, psychological jurisprudence and game theory to criticise the law from outside the restrictive realms of law itself. Simultaneously, I attempt to illuminate the argument for a shift (step through the looking glass) to another paradigm. I conclude that our judiciary finds itself in a position similar to that of Plato’s prisoners in the cave and will not reach the point where they apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice. Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. †Paper presented at the Critical Legal Conference, 4 September 2004, London, UK. This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Judge of Appeal, Mr. Justice P.J. Olivier. The paper is based on research conducted for the thesis in partial fulfilment of the degree LLD in the Faculty of Law at the University of Pretoria under the title ‘A critical legal argument for contractual justice in the South African law of contract.’ The degree supervisor is Professor Karin van Marle in the Department of Legal History, Comparative Law and Jurisprudence. The author wishes to thank the following persons for valuable deliberations and input: Karin van Marle, Graham Bradfield and Anashri Pillay. In addition, the author wishes to acknowledge and thank the University of Cape Town for financially supporting this research. apply relevant (constitutional) values directly to contractual disputes. The State is thus responsible for infusing contract law with contractual justice, by implementing legislation to this effect in order to limit the hegemonic consequences of the judiciary’s obsession with freedom of contract and utopian rules, which fail in reality to further the ideal of justice.     

论弱势群体的社会经济权利

弱势群体是现实社会的客观存在。处于社会弱势地位的人群并不是社会的弃儿,他们同样是社会共同体的平等成员。对弱势群体权利的关注和保障,奠基于基本的社会价值和人性立场。在诸多权利中,对于弱势群体而言,最重要、最具实质性的是社会经济权利。     

受教育权的司法救济

受教育权是公民的宪法权利,具有自由权、社会权、发展权的多重性质。通过行政诉讼解决受教育权案件有其积极意义,但也存在诸多弊端和局限性。宪法诉讼是受教育权司法救济的根本途径。只有从宪法层次和高度解决一系列的理念和技术障碍,逐步实行宪法司法化,才能最终保障受教育权的实现。     

《物权法》所有权概念的分析

所有权不仅是物权法,而且是整个民法中最为重要的概念之一。《物权法》第39条对所有权进行了描述性地定义,既继承了民法通则对所有权定义的传统,又揭示了所有权概念的部分内涵,具有一定的积极意义。但是,它没有囊括所有权的消极权能,更没有揭示出所有权作为“排他性支配权”的本质内涵。     

物权的平等保护与我国行政救济制度发展

我国新近通过的《物权法》确立了对公私物权予以平等保护的重要原则,该原则及其贯彻对我国现行行政救济制度提出了挑战,它要求行政救济制度必须从实体、程序等方面更新一些现有规定,并重视行政救济制度对物权相关权益的平等保护,来实现对公民、法人和其他组织物权较彻底的平等保护。     

安乐死"合法性"的法理分析

安乐死“合法性”研究应是“合法化”研究的前导。否则后者很可能陷入盲目。从逻辑上说,“安乐死合法性”具有三种可能内涵:安乐死不违法;依法律施行安乐死;安乐死是一种权利。分析表明,第一种和第三种安乐死合法性尚不能被现代法权系统承认。各国安乐死立法主要体现了第二种安乐死合法性。第一种安乐死合法性容易被遗忘和忽视;第二种安乐死合法性目前遭到了广泛的误解;第三种安乐死合法性则是误解的产物并且超出了法律的维度。