司法改革方法论的反思性整合——一个实践理性的视角

在全面依法治国的时代背景下,司法改革的推进需要在实践理性的指导下,通过新的方法论体系来予以重新解读和把握。当下司法改革的方法论面临价值理性缺失、工具理性误区和理论范式失衡的现实困境,需要在问题导向的基础上,借鉴和利用多种社会科学方法,透过多种视角探讨如何认识改革、如何推进改革、如何评价改革,在实践建构中实现方法体系的反思性整合。以"制度化的社会回应型司法"为基本目标,协调价值理性与工具理性的冲突,统合国家治理的实践逻辑与法治的价值逻辑,统筹推进司法制度的改革和构建。     

Development of an instrument for assessing the quality of forensic evidence and expert testimony from three feature-comparison methods: DNA,voice, and fingerprint analysis

In a context of rising violence and long-lasting impunity, in 2008, Mexico's criminal justice system underwent a radical change from an inquisitorial model to an adversarial one, to make it more effective, transparent, and expeditious. The new system tasked judges with publicly determining the admissibility of forensic evidence, as well as assessing its technical quality and probative value—tasks for which they currently receive little to no training. With the aim of contributing to the consolidation of the adversarial model, a comparative framework—in the form of a checklist—of the analysis of fingerprints, DNA samples, and voice recordings was created. To do so, a review of the academic literature, published reports, and guidelines was performed. The collected data were synthesized and submitted to a panel of Mexican judges, who provided feedback on its adequacy. The framework focuses on the steps on which quality assurance of forensic evidence depends, organized in five discrete stages that span from the collection of samples at the scene of a crime to the presentation of evidence at trial, specifying the main technical criteria experts should state to allow a decision maker to examine its accuracy and reliability. Differences and commonalities among the three methods were identified, particularly in terms of how qualitative and quantitative analyses are performed in each. Besides its potential usefulness as an aid for judicial decision-making, the checklist could be a valuable resource for training programs aimed at judges, as well as quality assurance programs.     

Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ Knowledge and Attitudes About Sex Trafficking of Minors: Associations with Gender,Race, and U.S. Region

Juvenile and family court judges are a professional group that have a significant amount of decision-making power in cases of sex trafficking of minors. The purpose of this project is to examine the association of juvenile and family court judges’ gender, race, and U.S. region with their attitudes and knowledge about sex trafficking of minors. Drawing from a survey of 55 juvenile and family court judges in the U.S., this study used standardized scales to measure attitudes and knowledge about child sex trafficking. Results indicate some differences by gender and geography in a sample of experienced judges across the U.S. The consistency of these findings are discussed in the context of other research and implications for targeted training.     

司法审查中的滥用职权标准——以最高人民法院公报案例为观察对象

考察最高人民法院公报上有关行政机关滥用职权的司法案例,可以发现其存在两种裁判逻辑。分离型裁判逻辑立基于形式违法性审查,根据“职权”或“滥用”单一要素进行判断,使得任何违法行使职权的行政行为都可能构成滥用职权。结合型裁判逻辑立基于实质违法性审查,认为构成滥用职权必须具备“职权”与“滥用”双重要素,滥用职权的实质是偏离法律目的行使裁量权。分离型裁判中的滥用职权与日常用语更为接近,结合型裁判中的滥用职权更符合行政诉讼法的立法精神。“滥用”的主观过错难以认定,影响了滥用职权标准的司法适用性。应以功能主义立场取代规则中心主义,借助均衡性的法律原则与功能性的自我规制技术,化解“滥用”之主观动机认定难的问题。     

论税收法定原则的司法化

税收法定原则的司法化是“全面落实税收法定原则”的必然要求,而传统理论疏漏了其中的司法内涵,导致税收法定原则出现了作为基本原则却难以直接指导和适用于税收司法的悖论。鉴于税收法定原则与罪刑法定原则的亲缘性,发展相对成熟的罪刑法定原则可以为完善税收法定原则的内涵构成提供三点启示。同时,结合税收法定原则的固有内容,税收法定原则的司法化应当在适用范畴上向司法原则扩围,价值层次上向实质正义升华,法定程度上向相对法定适当松动。据此,三路并进,税收法定原则的司法内涵得以全面、系统的补漏。税收法定原则司法内涵的完善将有助于打破税收法定原则司法化的理论困局,助推“全面落实税收法定原则”法治图景的实现。     

庭审阶段补充侦查制度合理性省思——以审判中心主义为背景

庭审阶段的补充侦查制度是职权主义诉讼结构和"侦查中心主义"的产物,其理念是追求"实体真实"。该制度不符合当前以审判为中心的刑事诉讼制度改革的精神,有违控辩平衡的诉讼原则,也不利于保障被告人的人权,导致司法资源浪费和诉讼效率降低,且有侦查权僭越审判权之嫌。针对上述弊端,结合检察机关正在实行的以"案-件比"为中心的考核机制,宜尽快废除庭审阶段的补充侦查制度。作为补偿,应当赋予控辩双方平等的证据申请权,改由人民法院进行庭外调查,庭外调查的重点应是有利于被告人的证据。对于庭审阶段翻证的证人,不宜由侦查(调查)机关单方面询问核实,而应当通知其出庭作证。     

苏轼权变思想及其司法实践

苏轼在强调遵守法律、尊重法律权威的同时,在司法实践中也采取了"法外权变"的特殊手段。这种看似突破法律的行为,恰恰是苏轼对法律的社会治理效果深入思考的体现,反应了苏轼对法律的深入认识。苏轼的权变思想源于其务实致用与以民为本的思想。他希望通过"法外权变"真正解决社会问题,而非不分缓急墨守成规。对于事关民生要害的案件即便突破法律规定也要尽快解决,避免更严重的后果。苏轼的这种权变思想,对当代的法治建设有着一定的参考作用。     

论我国刑事错案责任追究制度的完善 ——以侦查机关为视角

我国刑事错案追究制度自实行以来,其运用的合理性以及有效性一直饱受争议。从侦查机关的视角考察,错案追责情况主要存在纠正程序不具体、追责程序透明度不高等相关问题。结合我国实际情况考虑,从内部制度与外部监督入手考虑设立独立的错案追究机关来进行解决是可行的,同时可从细化错案责任追究的相关程序、明晰实体责任性质的认定标准、建立健全办案质量终身责任追究制度和建立追责程序相关信息发布机制等方面来完善刑事错案追究制度。     

“对赌协议”的裁判路径及政策选择——基于PE/VC与公司对赌场景的分析

PE/VC与目标公司对赌的司法裁判要点从合同效力转入合同可履行性后,需要面对两个层次的追问:一是以什么样的实体标准来判断履行障碍,二是由谁来判断是否存在履行障碍。华工案和“九民纪要”仅处理了第一个层次的问题,且主要以资本维持原则作为实体判断标准。然而,我国现行公司法资本维持原则过于粗疏,且缺乏“大分配”概念和底线规制的思路,导致“对赌协议”下的回购只能通过减资的途径,徒增成本。域外以清偿能力标准替代资本维持原则,体现了另一种以债权人利益为导向限制公司资产单向流出至股东的规制思路,但其商业逻辑上的合理性却无法掩盖更大的操作成本。就第二层次的判断主体而言,以美国特拉华州为代表,法官的商业判断逐渐让位于公司董事会的商业判断,却进一步凸显了公司、不同类别股东、债权人之间利益冲突的复杂状态。立法层面的价值判断与政策选择将最终决定司法裁判的走向,未来我国公司法的修订需要回应商业实践的诉求,同时PE/VC投资者也需要直面投资失败的风险承担。     

涉黑涉恶案件审判警务保障风险解析与防控

涉黑涉恶案件审判的特殊性决定了司法警察警务保障风险表现为:未能将被告人安全、及时押解至法院,未能对羁押待审被告人实施有效看守、管理,未能保障法庭的正常审判秩序和人员安全,未能规范执行警务。为减少涉黑涉恶案件审判警务保障风险,司法警察应树立预防为主、艺术决策、多举并进、以警为本的防控理念,并加强远程押解、院外审判看管和值庭、规范化执法风险的防控措施。