经济法再分配功能之法哲学证成

法哲学中分配旨在实现形式正义,构成法律正义的理念。现代社会回应型法的出现使指向实质正义的再分配得以确立,当这种以变革的国家哲学为支撑的回应型法律规范逐渐增多并自成系统时,标志着对应于政府经济调节职能的理念中的经济法生成。它通过维护市场的形式平等以促进经济的效率与发展为工具性价值目标,要求政府积极作为确保应得权利的创造与之结合,旨在实现整体实质公平。     

论政治文明与经济法--一种基于理念的解释

政治文明与经济法之间有着共同的社会公正理念、共同的经济人权理念和共同的和谐理念.经济法的产生带来了崭新的法律理念--社会公正,而社会公正也是文明的政治理念的基本内涵.经济法意义上的经济人权更多地体现为一种集体性的人权,从经济法调整对象的具体形态来看,几乎所有经济法律关系都包含着经济人权的基本内容,这些权利的实现状况也是一国政治文明实现程度的标志.作为克服"市场失灵"和"政府失败"缺陷的现代法,经济法的和谐理念是政治文明的和谐理念的法律表现和最终保障.     

Culture,values, and beliefs about economic justice

We examine the relationship between values and beliefs about economic justice by conducting a cross-cultural analysis. Social values of Americans and West Germans are compared and the relationships between values and beliefs about the fairness of the distribution of business profits are examined. Data are from the 1984 General Social Survey and its West German counterpart, the 1984 ALLBUS; both surveys contain identical value and economic justice items. We find that among citizens in both countries beliefs about the fairness of the distribution of business profits are related to values even when income and education are held constant, but the relationship is stronger in West Germany. For Americans, beliefs about the fairness of the distribution of business profits are related primarily to conservative values (beliefs that greater efforts lead to greater rewards). In addition, the positive influence of conservative values and of income level on fairness judgments is greater for Americans with higher levels of education. For West Germans, beliefs about the fairness of business profits are related both to conservative and to liberal values (beliefs that class divisions persist). In general, economic fairness judgments of West Germans have a strong ideological basis, but polarization associated with differing ideologies is found. Economic fairness judgments of Americans showed both a simpler ideological basis and some relationship to self-interest. The influence of both factors on Americans' fairness judgments seemed to be affected by socialization due to education. Results are discussed in terms of the prevailing economic ideologies in both countries.     

What restorative justice might learn from administrative theory

Two administrative ideal‐types related to competing forms of justice: retributive and restorative include ontological and epistemological foundations and associated organizational theory. The alternate understandings are coherently linked with the principles of justice informing retributive and restorative practices. Retributive justice is linked to formal organization based on instrumental rationality and individualist ontology, while restorative justice is linked to substantive organization based on ethical reasoning and relational ontology. Once constructed, ideal‐types can be used both to assess actual conditions on key characteristics as well as to make recommendations for organizational design. Therefore, conclusions are drawn about the importance of matching context to purpose, pointing toward further empirical research that will inform system design for restorative justice practices.     

分配正义与收益公正分配

收益公正分配是转型时期社会公正的重要维度,维系人权保护、经济发展、社会稳定与国家治理,蕴涵着分配正义理论。多种因素决定经济法分配正义是复合正义,强化在市场分配机制基础上的国家再分配职能,以促进社会基本结构的公正。经济法分配正义理论通过奠定收益分配之理论基础,提供收益分配之制度属性的路径促进收益公正分配,进而实现以社会公正为中心的可持续经济发展,推动中国社会顺利转型。而以分配正义为衡量尺度,我国收益分配制度需要进一步完善。     

经济法的反贫困机理和制度设计

贫困体现了市场失灵和政府失灵,而这两个失灵是经济法产生和发展完善的理论基础;反贫困所体现的公平观是一种新型的、可持续的发展观,它是经济法之实质公平的典型表现形式;政府反贫困行为还与经济法所追求的社会整体利益相契合,体现了经济法的社会本位思想;因此,经济法可以从宏观调控法和市场规制法两方面进行制度设计。     

经济法责任的实现与公诉权的现代转型

经济法责任有着自己独特的形态以及责任承担方式,经济法责任的实现机制主要是行政执法机制和诉讼机制,公益诉讼符合经济法责任社会性的要求,与经济法责任的实现之间具有天然的契合性。传统公诉权在我国长期被认为专指"刑事公诉权",客观上阻却了现代公诉权的拓展。随着现代法律对国家和社会公共利益保护的加强,传统公诉权制度日显单薄和不足。因此,建构现代公诉制度不仅是公诉权在具体制度中的应用和拓展,而且更加有利于强化检察机关法律监督职能,进而更好地保护国家和社会公共利益,维护社会公平正义,有效实现经济法责任。     

经济民主与社会正义——竞争法的深层底蕴

竞争法的价值追求不应该止于传统的自由和竞争理念,还应当审视自由和竞争之后的深层价值追求:经济民主和社会正义。经济民主是指经济领域内的民主。经济民主理念促使竞争法突破竞争者中心主义,关注多元主体的参与机制,突破禁令模式走向限制强势与扶助弱势相结合的机制。社会正义在经济领域具有特殊的涵义。由于自由竞争无法满足社会正义的要求,需要由政府等公共权力作为社会公意的代言人。政府应从社会正义原则的要求出发在遵循辅助性原则和民主性原则的前提下,为市场竞争制定有效的规范,维护弱势经济主体的基本利益。     

Economic justice,political behavior,and American political values

Although theories of political economy state that citizens' concerns about economic outcomes are important determinants of their political responses, an alternative perspective states that concerns about economic justice influence political responses. Survey data were examined to determine the relative influence of each of these factors on political evaluations and behaviors. Concerns about the justice of the procedures used by the government to make decisions about the distribution of benefits and services strongly predicted evaluations of President Reagan and participation in policy-related political behavior, and were weakly related to general political activism. Concerns about the justice of the distributions of economic benefits were related to evaluations of President Reagan but not to political activism. Judgments about personal economic gain or loss relative to the past predicted evaluations of President Reagan while global subjective judgments of present economic outcomes weakly predicted policy-related political activism. The effect of justice is explained by considering the relationship between citizens' concerns about economic justice and values associated with the American political culture.     

Analysing the economic justification for the reforms to social welfare and family law legal aid

The Ministry of Justice plans on saving £450 million per annum from the legal aid budget through reforms contained in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.Over 60% of these savings will be found by removing whole areas of law and types of problem from the scope of legal aid support. One of the principal justifications for these reforms is the economic imperative; reducing legal aid expenditure is necessary to meet the Government's fiscal targets. This article examined whether these reforms will generate the substantial savings identified in the Government's impact assessment, or whether these costs will be passed on to other areas of government. Data from the Civil and Social Justice Survey were used to model the behavioural responses of people no longer eligible for legal aid under the scope changes. Economic costs were estimated for these responses where they will be incurred by the state, although many of these costs are likely to be underestimates. Many costs could not be estimated including, inter alia, the cost of increased criminality where people seek redress outside of the justice system. The analysis focused on family and social welfare law, which together represent 82% of the proposed savings from the scope reforms. Based upon this analysis, the Government is unlikely to save more than 40% of its prediction. At the same time, these minimal savings could generate inequality of access to justice and overburden an already struggling alternative advice sector. A significant uptake in funded mediation within family law is predicted.     

国际商事仲裁司法监督研究

国际商事仲裁在解决商事纠纷中扮演着举足轻重的角色,对国际商事仲裁的监督也因此而显得重要,对国际商事仲裁的司法监督应贯彻经济性的观念,因此对我国国际商事仲裁的立法、司法提出相应要求。     

经济法与社会法关系考察

社会法与经济法的关系是一个具有相当理论与现实意义的问题。社会法是指国家为了救助弱者、反对歧视而制定的调整具有普遍社会意义的关系的法律规则的总称。社会法的调整领域主要包括四方面 ,社会正义理论等构成了其产生基础。经济法和社会法是第三法域下两个并行的部门法 ,两者在产生时间、目标、调整对象、公平观、调整方式等多方面存在不同。经济法和社会法应当协调发展、相互配合     

Patient inducement, provider priorities, and resource allocation in public mental health systems

Public mental health systems are increasingly facing demands from the criminal justice system and social services agencies to provide services and support in cases in which mental illness contributes to crime, homelessness, or poverty. In this article we analyze how policies from outside public mental health systems affect resource allocation within these systems, using examples from criminal justice. These policies use two types of mechanisms: inducing patients to consume treatment (by offering rewards or imposing penalties) and inducing clinicians to provide treatment (by creating priorities). We propose a classification of these social policies based on whether they affect demand through rewards or penalties or supply through priorities. We then relate the classification to data on patients treated in public systems to evaluate the current prevalence and potential for growth in these outside demands. These inducements impose a set of nonobvious costs on other patients who are not targeted by the policies. Furthermore, they create incentives for both patients and providers to modify their behavior in order to take advantage of rewards, avoid penalties, or better compete for resources with prioritized patients. We consider some policy implications for avoiding unintended consequences of these policies.     

论经济法在防范金融风险中的价值功能

2008年美国金融危机的爆发,更加凸显了经济法的价值理念,同时也是对经济法价值理念的一次实践检验。经济自由与经济秩序的统一,决定了政府与金融企业行为应纳入法治轨道,并保持各自的行为边界。对金融业的监管要体现经济法的安全与效率价值,并视经济环境的需要而突出重点。实质公平公正是社会分配的基准、拉动内需的前提、引领＂效率与公平并重＂的分配原则。金融安全是经济社会发展的基础,经济法的发展理念是金融业稳健运行的支撑和保障。我国应进一步弘扬经济法的价值理念,充分发挥经济法制度的前瞻性和预防性功能。     

论全球化时代国际经济法的公平价值取向——兼论发展中国家及我国的角色定位与战略选择

晚近,随着经济全球化的迅猛发展,国际经济领域掀起一股席卷各个层次的、以自由化为中心的造法运动,并初步构建出一个全球自由市场秩序体系.然而,当前国际经济立法面临着公平价值缺失的困境,并由此引发自身的"合法性"危机.鉴于此,在当代自由主义理论内部对正义内涵的争论中,寻找一种可资国际经济法的公平价值重构的理念成为必要,罗尔斯的复数正义理论对此提供了某种启发.当然,在国际经济法的公平价值重构中,发展中国家及我国对自身的正确定位以及战略选择也是至关重要的.     

经济法学科学化的法教义学路径

科学化是经济法学科发展的关键。法教义学呈现了法律科学的逻辑性、体系性和可验证性的基本要素,为经济法学的科学化提供了体系化的可能路径。根据法教义学"价值-规范-事实"的研究框架,在价值层面,经济法的社会功能是一种社会对国家经济治理权的想象和期待,旨在以正当、合理的经济介入方式维持和恢复经济系统的良序运行,经济介入的积极形式是培育市场功能条件,消极形式是对经济系统自主运行失序状态的纠正。在规范层面,经济法律规范体系可分解为四组经济法教义学的"理想类型",从而构建起由社会功能、公正优先和法律义务三个要素组成的法律命题体系。在事实层面,经济法应实现立法的体系化与司法的操作化,达成法教义与法治实践的良性互动。     

Damaska and the Faces of International Criminal Justice

Mirjan Damaka 's scholarly publications provide important insightsfor the analysis of systems of criminal justice at the internationallevel. This is particularly true for his major book: The Facesof Justice and State Authority – A Comparative Approachto the Legal Process. The book develops ideal types, or models,of the structure and the function of government. As far as thestructure of government, the ideal types of hierarchical andcoordinate officialdom are contrasted with one another. Withregard to the function of government in society, two other mutuallyexclusive ideal types are developed: the ideal type of the purelyreactive state and that of the purely activist state. In thepurely reactive state all state activities are essentially aform of dispute resolution between individual citizens. Consequently,all proceedings take the shape of a contest between two parties.In the reactive state, on the other hand, all law is an expressionof state policies. This entails that all proceedings are essentiallyan official inquiry enabling the state to implement its policies.The four ideal types call for several observations, one of thembeing that, at the international level, there is no authoritythat can be compared to a state. Setting up international criminal courts requires choices withregard to the structure and function of authority. Internationalhuman rights instruments provide no guidance as to the natureof the choices to be made. In particular, they do not indicatewhether the legal process should be structured as a contestbetween two parties or as an official inquiry. The same is truefor empirical evidence. An analysis of the structures of authority in internationalcriminal courts reveal that they represent hybrids of the hierarchicaland the coordinate ideal types of officialdom. The fact thatthese courts are unitary courts has a profound effect on evidentiaryarrangements. The most important issue raised by the exposition of ideal typesof The Faces of Justice concerns the relationship between thegoals of international criminal justice and the appropriatelegal process to serve their realization. Goals of a conflict-solvingnature are best served by a legal process structured as a contestbetween two parties and goals related to the implementationof policies by a legal process structured as an official inquiry.It is therefore essential to determine what goals are beingpursed by international criminal courts. One may distinguishhere between goals that international systems of justice mayor may not have in common with national systems of criminaljustice. The pursuit of the traditional goals of criminal justicecommon to international and national systems of justice doesnot provide compelling reasons to prefer either a contest modelor an inquest model of the legal process. This is different,however, for the idiosyncratic goals of international criminaljustice that set apart international systems of criminal justicefrom national systems. The pursuit of these goals makes it desirablethat historical facts are established as accurately as is possiblein the given circumstances. They are, therefore, best servedby a legal process that takes the shape of an official inquiry.In the hybrid type of procedure adopted by the ICTY there isinsufficient clarity about the procedural status of the peculiargoals of international criminal justice as well as about theuse of procedural means to pursue them. This entails that itis not really possible to determine whether this hybrid representsa success. Hybrid types of procedure cannot truly exist withoutadopting a view with regard to the impartiality of judges thatis inspired by standards enshrined in international human rightsinstrument rather than those that are characteristic for thelegal process shaped as a contest between two parties.     

论经济法视角下中西方经济自由思想的发展

经济法中所蕴含的经济自由思想是通过对经济主体的经济权利（力）和义务的配置来实现的。中西方经济自由思想的发展历程以及在经济自由内涵上的共识对我国当前经济发展具有借鉴意义。经济自由作为一种经济理念,是人们期待社会经济所能达到的理想状态即在法律所允许的范围内的自主经济决策和经济行为;作为一种经济制度安排方式,是经济体制构建和经济政策的取向,也是经济自由的理念在经济生活中的现实化,其实质是在经济领域内各经济主体之间的权利（力）义务的配置要达到的一定比例关系。     

国际经济行政法基本原则：平等保护与正当程序

国际经济行政法是调整跨国经济行政关系的国际、国内公法规范与原则的总和,换言之,国际经济行政法是政府规制市场的国际协调法。权利平等保护原则与正当程序原则分别从实体和程序两方面体现了国际经济行政法中的公平正义价值。从法理基础看,这两项原则既是理性精神的反映,也是市场经济发展和全球化趋势的必然要求,以及长期法律实践的结果,它对国际经济行政法领域提出了全新的标准。从实在法角度考察权利平等保护原则与正当程序原则在国际经济行政法领域的具体体现主要有国民待遇、最惠国待遇原则及反补贴制度,WTO对国内程序法的要求及WTO争端解决机制等。需要进一步完善这些制度,旨在从形式的平等过渡到实质的平等,建立平等互利基础上的国际经济法治与宪政规则。     

Justice, Sanctioning, and the Justice Model

The justice model has emerged as an alternative to the discredited rehabilitative ideal as a basis for sanctioning policy. Retributivism or just deserts is offered as the primary justification for the criminal sanction in this model, although sometimes in combination with incapacitation and deterrence as companion rationales for sanctioning. Desert is, additionally, an integral component of a sense of justice that is presented as an attribute of the justice model. Desert, both as a rationale for sanctions and as the basis for justice, is drawn from the philosophical models of Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. However, these models have some rather disturbing implications that have not been addressed by proponents of the justice model. A critical examination of them and their implications for criminology is therefore in order.