我国行政诉讼全面审查制度再思考——法院对行政机关认定事实的态度分析

我国人民法院对行政机关认定事实采取怀疑或否定态度,对行政机关认定事实实行全面审查。英美法系国家法院对行政机关的事实认定采取尊重态度,对事实问题采用宽松的审查标准。大陆法系国家行政诉讼一般不区分事实问题和法律问题,都进行全面审查。我国应当重新思考人民法院的全面审查制度,对专业性和技术性强的行政案件,以及行政机关适用简易程序当场作出决定的案件,人民法院应当尊重行政机关对事实的认定。对一般案件事实,如果法律规定以具备某种性质为要件时,审查行政机关对事实性质的判断是否符合法律的规定。对于重大的或对当事人利益有重大影响的行政案件,进行全面审查。     

德国法院体系探析

德国特色法院体系的形成与演变有其深刻的社会历史背景,首先是文化传统,其次是经济体制,第三是工人运动。德国的法院系统由宪法法院、普通法院和专门法院三类组成。宪法法院专门审理违宪案件;普通法院只审理刑事案件和民事案件;专门法院包括(普通)行政法院、财政法院、劳动法院、社会法院、专利法院、军事法院和惩戒法院等。除了(普通)法院和宪法法院具有独立地位外,其他法院均隶属于政府有关部门。德国行政审判权由各级行政法院与劳动法院、社会法院、财政法院等共同行使。专门法院的性质介于行政机关与司法机关之间,但行政机关的性质更多(本质上属于行政司法)。     

Domestic judicial defiance and the authority of international legal regimes

Tensions and occasional overt defiance of international courts suggest that compliance with international regimes is not a self-evident choice for domestic judges. I develop a formal theory of domestic judicial defiance in which domestic and supranational judges vie for jurisprudential authority in a non-hierarchical setting. The model emphasises the role of domestic non-compliance costs and power asymmetries in determining the conduct of domestic and international judges. I argue that the EU represents a special case of a particularly effective international regime. Weak domestic courts have little to gain from an escalated conflict with the European court of Justice. But even domestic judicial superpowers like the German Federal Constitutional Court have strong incentives to seek mutual accommodation with European judges. The analysis also yields new insights into concepts, such as “judicial dialogue” and “constitutional pluralism” that have featured prominently in the legal literature, and suggests new hypotheses for empirical research.     

试论法院证据调查制度的客体———以案件事实为视角

法院证据调查的客体是法院证据调查权所指向的对象.在民事诉讼中,司法证明的目的在于获得对案件事实的认识,因此,案件事实是法院证据调查制度的客体.只有对案件事实获得真实发现,才能做出妥当的司法裁判.在案件事实中,只有对裁判具有显著意义的主要事实、具有抽象性的间接事实和涉及公文书真伪辨别的辅助事实以及具有证明必要性的争议事实,才是法院实施证据调查的具体客体.     

四级两审制的发生和演化

司法体制改革的一个重要举措是设立最高人民法院巡回法庭,这一改革举措可能意味着我国法院层级或审级变化的新动向.从建国以来的历史经验看,法院层级和审级变化并非彼此孤立,且都从属于国家政治形态设计.1954年中共中央取消大区分院,促动了法院审级由三审制改为两审制.两审制带来的法院功能和案负变化,导致中级人民法院层级的设立.为了保障四级两审制平滑运作,民事调解制度扩大,基层法院派出法庭普遍设立.这一法院层级和审级制度的设立,契合了扩大省级地方权力的政治目标.1983年以来“地改市”运动、民事调解制度的萎缩以及撤销部分派出法庭,使得四级两审制的基础发生松动,法院层级和审级方面的新变化由此产生.     

论法院处理环境纠纷案件中的司法能动

司法能动是法院在案件审理中,不因循先例和遵从成文法的字面含义进行司法解释的一种司法理念以及基于此理念的行动。我国法院在发挥司法能动性,处理环境纠纷案件方面作出了大量努力,为经济社会发展提供了司法保障。但法院在发挥司法能动性处理环境纠纷案件中仍然存在较大的问题。解决这些问题,必须把握法院在环境纠纷案件处理中司法能动的向度,落实司法独立,引导法官正确行使自由裁量权,努力培养环境司法专业人才,发挥法官适用法律的能动性。     

刑事诉讼审级制度之反思与重构

现代各国的刑事诉讼审级制度虽有一定差异,但多是以三审终审制为原则确立的。随着市场经济的发展和我国法院改革的不断深化,现有四级两审终审制的缺陷已不断显现,并与现代审级制度的一般原理相悖。现有审级制度在程序设计上以及在与司法体制相融合时表现出的渚多缺陷,已经影响到对被告人诉讼权利的保护和司法公正的实现,因此需重新建构以三审终审为原则,以一审终审为补充的刑事诉讼审级制度,同时实行法院的职能分层,规范再审制度。     

What Determines Judicial Prestige? An Empirical Analysis for Judges of the Federal Court of Australia

This article examines judicial citations to analyze the determinantsof judicial prestige in the Federal Court of Australia. Firstwe construct two alternative measures of judicial prestige forall current and retired judges of the Federal Court. Second,we regress these measures of judicial prestige on a series ofexplanatory variables covering age on appointment, appointinggovernment, prior experience, which law school the judge attended,how many law review articles the judge has published, gender,and tenure. We compare our results with those of previous studiesthat examine the determinants of judicial influence and prestigein courts in the United States and the High Court of Australia.One of the main contributions of the article is to provide evidencefrom an intermediate appellate court that can be used to testthe general application of findings as to what determines judicialprestige in the United States to courts in other countries withdifferent institutional frameworks.     

The Incidence and Structure of Conflict on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

In 1982, Congress established the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, a specialized court, with the objective of reducing judicial conflict and harmonizing circuit law in specific policy areas of special complexity. This article examines the incidence and determinants of judicial conflict on the U.S. courts of appeals, focusing specifically on the Federal Circuit. Using international trade and customs regulation cases decided during the 1982 to 1995 terms, the analysis reviews three possible explanations of judicial conflict: policy-oriented, sociolegal, and organizational. The analysis shows that conflict appears in 8.4 percent of the trade and customs regulation decisions rendered by the Federal Circuit during the period of study. The policy direction of Federal Circuit decisions and the court's hierarchical relationship with lower specialized courts provide the strongest explanation for the emergence of conflict on the court. Organizational factors such as panel composition evinced rather anemic explanatory capacity. The results raise an important functional similarity between the Federal Circuit and the generalist courts of appeals. Contrary to the laments of legal practitioners that conflict on the Federal Circuit is excessive relative to conflict on the generalist circuit courts, this analysis finds little support for that claim. Rather, the level of overt conflict on the court is actually low and corroborates conflict levels that have been reported for other U.S. courts of appeals.     

Friends of the Court: The Republican Alliance and Selective Activism of the Constitutional Court of Turkey

During the past two decades, scholars have noted a global expansion of judicial power and court‐led rights revolutions. Far from leading a rights‐revolution, the Constitutional Court of Turkey became renowned for its restrictive take on civil liberties during this period. Why are some high courts more activist than others in protecting and expanding civil rights and liberties? I argue that judicial power and judicial independence offer incomplete explanations of judicial activism on questions of rights. Even powerful courts are activist only selectively, using their clout to protect some groups while suppressing the demands of others. Building on perspectives on legal mobilization and judicial entrenchment, I argue that the sociopolitical alliances in which high courts and judiciaries participate explain the selective nature of their activism. The initial parameters of these alliances are set during critical junctures when formerly dominant coalitions are displaced and new institutions entrench new alliances. Such alliances are not static, however, and struggles within alliances can transform high courts' orientations on rights questions.     

No Room

In 2015, Russia's judicial system saw a marked expansion in the repressive activity of the law enforcement bodies. For the first time in many years, there was a significant rise in the frequency of sentences involving imprisonment, while standards of proof in the Russian courts declined. The judiciary tried to compensate for its inability to resist pressure from the law enforcement bodies through the unprecedented application of amnesty in court verdicts. Sporadically declared amnesties have become almost the only thing protecting the Russian penal system from overcrowding.     

公众意见在裁判结构中的地位

从裁判依据的类型分析,公众意见只能作为一种事实依据,参与个案裁判。在常规案件中,公众意见作为一种准用的辅助性依据,可以通过弱的裁量成为合理化判决结论的说明性事实。在遇有法律漏洞的疑难案件中,与社会性主张相一致的公众意见,如果耦合法律体系中的法律原则或基本权利规范,可以籍由强的裁量充当个案推理的运作性依据,成为非常情形中正当化个案规则创制的立法性事实。在日趋多元化和复杂化的转型中国,法律系统必须在稳定性和灵活性、普遍正义和个案正义之间寻求一种平衡;判断公众意见的个案裁判地位,同样需在辅助性依据或运作性依据、说明性事实或立法性事实之间寻求一种平衡。     

UNIQUE CONTRIBUTIONS OF LIMITED JURISDICTION TRIAL COURT JUDGES

An examination is made of the extent to which limited jurisdiction trial court judges make unique contributions to court policies. The methodology and political implications of minor court research differs from those in higher courts. Analysis of variance found that minor court judges in multiple-judge courts differed in the level and uniformity of fines and costs assessed in misdemeanor cases. Binary tests for regression discontinuity found that judges in single-judge courts initiated policy changes upon entering office. Such knowledge of unique judicial contributions would enable citizens and court officials to make informed decisions in judge selections and court reforms.     

事实认定权：模式的选择与建构

就事实探知理念以及案件事实认定方式而言 ,我国的事实认定模式属于职权主义认定模式。这一事实认定体制在事实探知绝对化理念指导下形成 ,存在着诸多缺憾 ,应当进行改造和完善。重构我国事实认定体制的基本思路是 :重新界定各级法院的审判职能 ,并以此为基础合理配置法院在认定事实上的权限分工 ;根据案件的不同性质和类型 ,建立灵活多样的事实认定机制 ;从程序正义的基本要求出发 ,完善诉讼准备程序 ,并强化庭审程序的事实认定功能。     

Environmental crime and problem-solving courts

Environmental harms are by their nature complex and as such give rise to formal legal responses that range from simple regulatory intervention to multi-faceted court order. The purpose of this paper is to explore the emergence of environmental courts and the development of judicial and tribunal expertise in this specific area. A wide range of sanctions are now available and being actively applied by such bodies. Moreover, in many instances, the philosophical approach adopted by these courts is that of problem-solving. The combination of specialist expertise and innovative methods of intervention are progressively revolutionising judicial practice in regards to contemporary environmental issues.     

No Confidence: Confidentiality,Ethics and the Law of Academic Privilege

The law recognizes several evidentiary privileges, including a qualified privilege recognized by statute or court precedent in forty-eight states and several federal circuits that allows journalists to protect confidential sources. Meanwhile, ethical practices for social science surveys require pledging confidentiality to respondents, a practice that can conflict with subpoenas and court orders requiring revelation of such information. Only a handful of court decisions have formally recognized a privilege for scholars similar to a reporters’ privilege, and an examination of the court decisions that have either ruled on or discussed the issue reveals that while many courts recognize the interests of scholars in confidentiality, most courts decline to recognize a legal privilege for researchers. Courts do, however, often limit disclosure to accommodate these concerns. The specific circumstances and rationales of these decisions are discussed and analyzed.     

基层法院裁判过程的法社会学分析——以离婚案件中的子女抚养问题切入

离婚案件几乎是基层人民所受理的民事案件中数量最多的一类案件,这类案件的裁判也因此具有很大的典型性和代表性,能够部分地反映基层人民法院的司法生态.透过法院的裁判文书,并结合所在地的社会情境,我们发现的是一个模糊的基层人民法院司法群像——冲突的身份,混合的功能.显然基层人民法院能做什么,做不了什么,这都是需反思的.我国基层法院的现有结构及运行模式都需进行调整.     

Understanding Judicial Hierarchy: Reversals and the Behavior of Intermediate Appellate Judges

One of the central controversies in the judicial behavior literature is the extent to which judges' ability to act according to their ideological preferences is affected by their location in the judicial hierarchy. Judges on intermediate appellate courts have different decisionmaking environments than high court judges. As a result, the goals of lower appellate court judges may differ from those of their superiors: the quest for legal accuracy may compete with the desire to pursue policy preferences. Analysis of the reversal rate of the U.S. circuit courts of appeals offers insight into the extent to which these judges balance the pressures of their own policy preferences with the desire to achieve the legally accurate result in cases they decide.     

我国环境审判专门化的探索与发展——基于环保法庭的法律分析

环境审判专门化在生态文明建设的大背景下具有正当性和必要性。我国设立的各种环保法庭是对环境审判专门化的有益探索。但是我国的环保法庭还存在审判模式不统一、管辖权缺少法律依据、组成人员不专业等问题。环境审判专门化的制度建构应该从合理确定环保法庭的管辖权和受案范围、放宽原告诉讼资格推进环境公益诉讼、实现环保法庭组成人员的多元化、促进环保法庭诉讼与非诉讼程序的衔接等方面进行。