法官、现代性与法理认同

现代性的司法制度建构对我们今天中国的法治建设来说是非常重要的。它至少可以为我们的后者解决一个法理认同的基本问题。按照西方司法的样式改造中国的司法体制,几乎成了中国法学界的主流意识。但中国的法官很少有人在法理认同上觉得自己应该是法律知识和法律价值的的创造者,而不仅是追随者。全球化的过程不仅不能消除认同问题,反而使之更加突出,这就是为什么一个具有中国特色的话语在这个愈益全球化的世界上看来仍然会保持其重要性的原因。     

单位犯罪中单位行为与单位意志的认定

界定单位犯罪中的两个重要概念是单位行为和单位意志。特别对单位行为的构成、单位行为与个人行为的界限、单位意志的整体性的体现、利益归属的团体性等问题应着重加以梳理。     

The Cultural Context of Restorative Justice: Journeys Through Our Cultural Forests to a Well-Spring of Healing

In the field of Conflict Transformation, Restorative Justice (RJ) is often perceived as a transformative process focused on healing relationships after a specific harm. The parties considered in a RJ setting are those harmed, those responsible and the community impacted. This is particularly true in the field of criminal and transitional justice, and in an extended and spiritual view, there is reconciliation with the parties and God. Despite cultural differences, RJ theory and concepts have been accepted favorably in the many countries. From a viewpoint focused on methodology and process, however, cultural differences have a significant effect for implementation. For example, important concepts such as control, choice, harm, responsibility, apology, shame, reconciliation and forgiveness vary greatly in the manner in which they are perceived from culture to culture and may create obstacles for successful implementation of a successful process when one culture’s process and definitions are forced upon another. Therefore, promotional factors (i.e., culture and religion) and the implication of semiotics (cultural definition or meaning) are an absolute consideration in developing a RJ process within a particular culture. This paper discusses the cultural differences between the United States and Japan with regard to semiotic obstacles in the implementation of a RJ model in the Japanese criminal justice system. While the exploration of cultural differences, particularly between the United States and Japan is not new and has been the focus of many disciplines, little has been considered regarding the assimilation and implementation of a Western RJ model into the Eastern culture of Japan. In sum, is an attempt to clarify and integrate the effects of cultural differences for some factors (i.e., Control/Choice, Harm, Apology, Responsibility, Shame, Forgiveness, and Reconciliation) as they apply to a RJ based reconciliation process focused in Semiotics, Social psychology and the Sociology of law as they apply to the United States and Japan.     

对司法行政文化相关问题的思考

我国司法行政事业在其存在和发展过程中,经过长期的积淀正在形成具有中国特色的社会主义司法行政文化体系,并继续随着司法行政事业的发展而不断繁荣。关于司法行政文化的研究已经受到广泛关注并成为重大理论研究课题。本文以司法行政文化的内涵及属性为切入点,对中国特色社会主义司法行政文化的作用及相关问题进行了探讨,以期对司法行政文化的发展有所裨益。     

Diverting and Abdicating Judicial Discretion: Cultural, Political, and Procedural Dynamics in California Juvenile Justice

Although tensions between substantive and formal rationality in the adult criminal justice system have received a great deal of attention, the existence of these tensions in the juvenile justice system has received little scholarly consideration. I seek to remedy this gap by exploring how punitive policies associated with the war on crime impact the formal and informal process of justice, the court community and work group, and the exercise of discretion in the juvenile courts. Drawing on qualitative data collected in three juvenile courts in Southern California, I identify the mechanisms by which prosecutors divert judicial discretion from the traditional rehabilitation-oriented bench officers to bench officers who are more accepting of the criminalization of juveniles. In addition, I investigate how and why rehabilitation-oriented bench officers at times abdicate their decisionmaking authority and make rulings that contradict their own assessments. My findings suggest that as the war on crime is extended to youth, the juvenile courts increasingly share the criminal courts' emphasis on offense rather than offender, enhanced prosecutorial power, and adversarial relationships within the court.     

Revisiting Informal Justice: Restorative Justice and Democratic Professionalism

Restorative justice is a form of informal justice growing rapidly among criminal justice practitioners. It decenters the focus of criminal justice from the offender breaking a law of the state to the harm caused the victim and community. Resolution is said to come from offenders taking responsibility and making amends for the harm done and from communities supporting the victim and providing offenders with opportunities and skills to reintegrate as contributing members.
Restorative justice theory largely ignores the role of professionals in the criminal justice process, and yet professionals have played a dominant part in initiating many restorative justice programs. Several theoretical traditions recognize professionals as being important intermediaries between citizens and the state. The theory of democratic professionalism argues that professionals can play crucial roles in increasing and improving democratic participation in public affairs. This article examines two functioning restorative justice programs to flesh out what democratic professionalism might look like in operation—what tasks professionals perform and what citizen involvement means to the professionals. We argue that restorative justice cannot get along without professionals and that democratic professionalism may help restorative justice to avoid some of the problems associated with other approaches to informal justice by increasing true community participation but balancing it with concern for individuals' rights.     

交换的正义与分配的正义——纠纷解决途径的正当性基础解读

民事诉讼程序对于纷争利益的处理,主要是通过合意与决定这两种途径来进行的.合意实质上就是当事人出于自身利益的考虑,而与对方达成的利益交换契约,其正当性主要体现在利益交换方面,要符合交换正义的要求;而决定则是法院根据自己对于正义的理解,对争议问题作出的安排,其正当性则体现在利益的强制配置方面,应当遵循分配正义准则.在具体的案件处理中,两种正义经常交织在一起,共同构成裁判结果的正当性基础.     

Justice Beliefs in School: Distinguishing Ultimate and Immanent Justice

This paper combines two recent developments in just world research: the conception of belief in a just world (BJW) as a resource for coping and well-being in everyday life, and the distinction between two different facets of BJW, namely belief in immanent justice (BIJ) and belief in ultimate justice (BUJ). Moreover, these two aspects are adapted to the school context and educational psychology. Scales for measuring ultimate and immanent justice in schools were developed within a German pilot reform project with a sample of 1274 pupils. The two facets could be distinguished by means of factor analysis. The reliability of the two scales is satisfactory, and their validity is confirmed by their differential correlational patterns. Results show that not every form of BJW automatically functions as a coping resource. In fact, only BUJ is able to protect pupils' mental well-being, whereas immanent justice can actually jeopardize well-being. Similarly, BUJ is associated with the perception of solidarity and learning enjoyment in class, whereas BIJ is more closely associated with the experience of rivalry and competition in class. Finally, the socialization of the two justice beliefs is considered. The cross-sectional data provide some evidence to suggest that friendly and supportive parenting styles can promote BUJ, whereas strict parenting styles may further BIJ. More longitudinal research is needed to obtain further insights into these phenomena.     

促进刑事司法的公众认同 努力构建和谐社会——评《刑事判决的合法性研究》

这些年来，社会公众对刘涌案、佘祥林案、邱兴华案等案件的刑事判决表现出强烈的不满，再加上刑事案件涉法上访率的居高不下，表明当前我国刑事案件的判决在整体上难以获得社会公众的认同。如何有效地解决这一问题，成为困扰刑事法学理论界和刑事司法实务界的一道难题。河北大学政法学院教授冯军博士经过潜心研究，在其出版的《刑事判决的合法性研究：在政治社会学语境中的分析》一书中，给我们提供了一些有益的启示。     

文物返还国际诉讼中外国立法的承认与执行

在文物返还国际争议诉讼中外国文物立法的承认与执行问题上,由于受“外国公法不予承认和执行”传统思维的影响,一国的文物国家所有权立法或出口管制法一般很难得到其他国家的承认和执行。但外国公法原则和强行法理论的现代发展、典型的司法判决、文物保护国际公约的签订、文物市场国的实践都对文物立法的承认与执行产生了深远的影响。这些可喜的变化表明,没有理由从表面上排除与文物保护相关的外国法规则,尤其当这些规则与保护文物的国内及国际立法与政策保持一致时更应如此。     

跨文化交往：多元化模式与普世性价值观

不同文化之间的交流有着漫长的历史,跨文化交往是这一发展过程的最高形式.受历史、社会、文化等因素的影响,跨文化交往形成了多种模式.不同文化的价值观对这种多元化模式的形成起到了至关重要的作用,这些模式也反映了各自的价值观.跨文化交往既要推进本文化的发展,维护本文化的价值观,同时还应该在交往过程中努力创造新的、为所有交往参与者所共同接受的价值观,即普世性价值观.这种价值观应该以维护、促进不同文化之间的交往为目的,以和平、平等、协商为主要内容.     

正义:法律与权利

引论 :正义是人之行为的一种属性我们选用“正当行为规则”一术语来指称那些有助益于自生自发秩序之型构的“目的独立”的规则(ｅｎｄ -ｉｎｄｅｐｅｎｄｅｎｔｒｕｌｅｓ) ,并以此与那些“目的依附”的 (ｅｎｄ -ｄｅｐｅｎｄｅｎｔ)组织规则相对照。前者是内部规则 (ｎｏｍｏｓ) ,而内部规则不仅是“私法社会”〔 1〕 的基础 ,而且也是使开放社会得以形成的基础 ;而后者 ,就其作为法律来说 ,乃是确定政府组织问题的公法。然而 ,我们并不认为 ,所有事实上有可能为人们所遵循的正当行为规则都应当被视作是法律 ,而且我们也不认为 ,每一条构…