论法国公共秩序理论的新发展——兼论我国民事立法与司法的启示

公共秩序从传统的政治、社会以及道德领域走向经济领域,于此,公共秩序具有保护性公共秩序与指导性公共秩序的区分。公共秩序在法律调整以及法律体系的构建与协调方面都具有重要的作用。法国司法实践已经改变了违反公共秩序概念的法律行为绝对无效的做法。我国民事立法需要以公序良俗的概念来取代传统的公共利益概念。在民事司法中,尽量避免适用公共利益对私人的法律行为进行判断,更不能一概地以此来判断法律行为为绝对无效。     

自然资源国家所有权公权说

自然资源国家所有权在主体、客体、内容、行使、救济与责任等方面都与物权存在本质差异，其并非处理平等主体间财产关系、以确立特定主体对特定物的“直接支配”为内容的民法物权，而是划分国家与个人界限，为“全民”意义上的抽象国家以立法和行政手段“间接干预”资源利用提供合法依据的宪法公权。资源国家所有权与资源物权并非同一层面的事物，二者并不排斥，而是互补并存。国家所有权只是形成资源利用秩序的前提，资源物权才是建立秩序的关键，其需要明确的法律规定，而无法从宪法权性质的国家所有权中推出。没有清楚区分公权与私权、公物与私产是导致国有资源与民众产生“疏离”、偏离公益本质的根源，这一状况应当改变。     

自然资源国家所有权公权说再论

从宪法与民法之别、权利与权力之别以及宪法第9条的完整表述来看,资源国家所有权的公权性确定无疑.作为国家对于公共资源的一种“公权性支配”,资源国家所有权的实质是对资源利用的“积极干预”权,内容在于保障自然资源的合理利用,通过立法、行政和司法加以行使,并为这三种权力施加规范与限制.在实践层面,资源国家所有权只有衍生出以资源实际利用者为主体、以对资源物的合理利用为内容的私权性的“资源利用权”,才能真正形成资源利用秩序.日常生活中在民法层面使用的“国家所有权”的本质是“公共法人所有权”,其并非严谨的法律概念,其成立须一系列条件支撑,范围较窄,其与“宪法国家所有权”的区别是划分“国有私物”与“国有公物”的前提.资源国家所有权来源于主权但不等于主权,其为资源主权的积极行使创设权力载体和概念装置,具有重要意义.     

Reason of State and Public Reason

“Reason of state” is a concept that is rarely used in contemporary legal and political philosophy, compared to everyday parlance; “public reason,” in contrast, is ubiquitous, especially in liberal philosophy, as a legitimacy‐conferring device. In this article it is argued that the unpopularity of the notion of “reason of state” is partly due to its notorious ambiguity. Three different usages of the notion can be identified: a “thin” usage (where “reason of state” is equivalent to the common good); an “ironical” usage (where it is used pejoratively to denounce it as a pretext for application of illegitimate or illegal means); and a “pre‐emptive” usage (where “reason of state” functions as a legitimate second‐order exclusionary reason used to override otherwise mandatory first‐order rules of action). It is argued that only the “thin” usage is helpful in a by‐and‐large liberal‐democratic context. The article then discusses the main dilemmas related to the concept of public reason, especially in its most influential, Rawlsian interpretation, and defends the concept against common critiques. Finally, the two concepts of “reason of state” and public reason are compared, and it is argued that a “thin” usage of “reason of state” is functionally equivalent to public reason, and that both resonate with the theory of “input democracy” (focusing, as it does, on the legitimacy of reasons—or motivations—for applying coercive rules to individuals). The article also identifies a problematic feature of “reason of state”: its emphasis on the state as a privileged interpreter of such reasons and/or as identifying the pool of actors within which the “constituency” of public reason is ascertained. There are good reasons to resist both of these consequences: the former because of its potentially authoritarian consequences, the latter because of reasons provided by cosmopolitan political conceptions.     

Transforming Public Health Law: The Turning Point Model State Public Health Act

Law is an essential tool for improving public health infrastructure and outcomes; however, existing state statutory public health laws may be insufficient. Built over decades in response to various diseases/conditions, public health laws are antiquated, divergent, and confusing. The Turning Point Public Health Statute Modernization National Collaborative addressed the need for public health law reform by producing a comprehensive model state act. The Act provides scientifically, ethically, and legally sound provisions on public health infrastructure, powers, duties, and practice. This article examines (1) how statutory law can be a tool for improving the public's health, (2) existing needs for public health law reform, (3) themes and provisions of the Turning Point Act, and (4) how it is being used by public health practitioners.     

The New International Health Regulations: An Historic Development for International Law and Public Health

The adoption of the new International Health Regulations (IHR) in May 2005 represents an historic development for international law and public health. This article describes the IHR revision process and analyzes why the new IHR constitute an advance in global health governance.     

因特网对国家主权的冲击及对策

因特网 (国际互联网 )的迅猛发展 ,深刻地改变了我们的生产、生活、学习乃至休闲娱乐的方式 ,但它在给我们带来机遇、提供便利的同时 ,也给我们带来了许多负面影响 ,尤其是使国家主权受到严重冲击。本文从法律的视角分析了因特网对国家政治、经济和文化主权形成的威胁 ,并提出了相应对策。     

互联网信贷监管新规的源起与逻辑

互联网信贷监管新规是对治理互联网信贷乱象的经验总结,更是规范和促进互联网信贷行业持续健康发展的制度创新.大数据技术加持下客户渠道与风险定价的融于一体,显著地提升了互联网信贷的风险控制能力,而大数据风险控制模式下对数据、场景、技术进步的依靠又向金融监管当局提出了如何应对信贷环节分工拆解的重大挑战.新规回应了互联网信贷的技...     

论怠于履行职责致害的国家赔偿

2010年国家赔偿法的修订,并未把怠于履行职责致害赔偿统一地、明文地写入新法之中。然而,此类国家赔偿的依据以多种形式存在。通过法律解释,行政怠职致害的各种情形,皆可纳入国家赔偿范围;相比之下,司法怠职致害赔偿的依据较为零碎,需实务谨慎开拓其范围。更为重要的问题转而落在怠于履行职责之认定和致害赔偿责任之确定上。前者需认识到作为义务来源的多样化,避免陷入机械法条主义;后者应视怠于履行职责直接致害、与自然原因或受害人原因结合致害、与第三人侵权共同致害的不同情形,确定国家赔偿的全部责任、部分责任、连带责任、按份责任和补充责任,而不宜奉行单一的责任承担方式。     

自然资源国家所有权之国家所有制说

财产权的宪法史可分为人权财产权和国家财产制两个阶段。自然资源归国家所有是国家财产制的组成部分，是现代宪法创设的用以实现国家目的的手段，其基本特征是国家垄断，其基本工具价值是垄断。以权利观审视自然资源国家所有权，它具有主体的唯一性和权利的专有性、不可变更性和价值优先性等特点。宪法上的自然资源国家所有权的实质是国家权力，是管理权，而非自由财产权。     

网络平台的公共性及其实现——以电商平台的法律规制为视角

网络平台是组织生产力的新型主体,在数字经济时代承担着维护网络市场秩序、保障用户权益的公共职能。网络平台对其用户,特别是对平台内经营者,具有强大的支配力和影响力,此种平台权力属于典型的私权力。网络平台行使私权力有助于减少平台内经营行为的负外部性,弥补政府规制能力的不足,但其私权力也容易遭到滥用。除了要借助市场竞争机制和传统私法规范约束平台私权力,还有必要引入公法原理及其价值要求,对平台私权力进行适度干预。网络平台制定和实施规则时,应遵循基本的程序正义和实体正义标准。法院应对平台滥用私权力的行为进行必要的司法审查。立法者应根据权责利相统一的原则,科学合理地设置平台责任。     

互联网时代网络舆论引导机制的构建研究

互联网是社会生活中表达民意、畅通民情、汇聚民智的重要渠道,其影响力越来越大。因此,迫切需要加强网络舆论引导机制建设。在新形势下,针对我国网络舆论引导机制存在的一些问题,进一步做好网络舆论引导工作,必须在遵循柔性管理、第一时间、主流引导和疏堵结合原则的前提下,加快建立快速反应的网络舆论引导机制。     

The Public University's Performance in State Arts Policy: Lessons from Virginia

This article investigates the extent to which public higher education institutions participate in state-level arts policy through a history of selected budgets and a textual analysis of performing arts presenting centers at public higher education institutions in Virginia. Evidence from this research suggests that the arts policy field is altered by the emergence of public higher education institutions as policy actors. The findings have financial and decision-making implications for arts policy makers, university administrators, and arts agencies as the participation of public higher education institutions affords new opportunities and challenges for the state encouragement of the arts.     

The Further Evolution of the State Enterprise as a Legal Entity

The 22nd Congress of the CPSU adopted a new Program for the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and set forth in it a concrete plan for the building of a communist society in the USSR. The CPSU Program envisages as the chief economic task of the next twenty years the establishment of the material and technical base for communism. Effectuation of this vast undertaking also presupposes a further "improvement of the legal norms regulating functions of economic organization, culture and education, and promoting the solution of the tasks of the building of communism and the allround flourishing of the personality." (1)     

作为复合型主观公权利的公物利用

公物利用系公物最为核心的价值所在,乃与国家供给义务对应之公众取用权利。现实困境显示公物利用的权利性质未获应有重视,公众用公物利用因反射利益的错误定性而陷入救济盲区,公务用公物利用则因受益主体错位而沦为权力寻租的"重灾区"。通过社会基础、国家理念等外在因素与权利来源、利益属性等内在因素对公物利用性质予以双重审视,揭示公物利用性质由天然自由向反射利益、纯粹自由权过渡并最终发展为复合型主观公权利。公物利用中公私利益之互动关系可以证成公物利用作为复合型主观公权利之真实面貌。以上对消解公物利用的现实困境具有决定性意义。