Actual Malice in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights decided four cases in recent years that represent a positive step for freedom of expression in nations that belong to the Organization of American States. In 2004 and again in 2008, the court stopped short of adopting a standard that would require proof of actual malice in criminal defamation cases brought by public officials. In 2009, however, the court seemed to adopt the actual malice rule without calling it that. The court's progress toward actual malice is chronicled in this article. The article concludes that the court's decision not to explicitly use the phrase “actual malice” may be a positive development for freedom of expression in the Americas.     

Defining Defamation: Community in the Age of the Internet

The ability to instantly communicate with a global audience has created numerous legal uncertainties as jurists struggle to adapt age-old jurisprudence to modern-day technologies —and defamation jurisprudence is no exception. The definition of a plaintiff's community is critical to his or her ability to succeed in a defamation lawsuit, often determining whether the plaintiff is a public figure or whether the plaintiff's reputation has been injured in his or her community. This article examines federal and state defamation jurisprudence to compare the factors courts have used to define community in both traditional print and broadcast cases with the factors used in more recent Internet defamation cases. It then suggests three possible rubrics courts could employ to more uniformly define community in Internet defamation cases.     

Comparative Institutional Analysis,the European Court of Justice and the General Principle of Non‐Discrimination—or—Alternative Tales on Equality Reasoning

The general principle of equality in European law is often held to be inconsistently applied by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and insufficiently supported by methodology. Contrary to this assessment, this paper argues that there is substantial coherence and theoretical underpinning to the court's equality reasoning. First, it shows that the respective case‐law can be subdivided into three groups, depending on the level of scrutiny applied. Second, it establishes that the prevailing accounts have difficulty in explaining the court's choice of scrutiny due to their limited selection of analytical parameters. Third, it concludes that comparative institutional analysis offers an alternative framework to make the ECJ's testing approaches in equality matters more intelligible.     

Defamation in cyberspace: A Japanese perspective

The aim of this paper is two-fold: first, to introduce how Japanese law and its jurisprudence have dealt with the case of on-line defamation, which is arguably one of the most acute problems in modern society, and second, to critically examine the efficacy of such an approach. The recent decision of the Supreme Court in on-line defamation (as oppose to off-line defamation) will be introduced as an exemplar of the way Japanese law and its jurisprudence have dealt with such an acute problem. A first step will be to provide, by way of background, a brief overview of how defamation in a conventional sense has been treated by the Japanese legal system. The second step will be to outline how the Japanese jurisdiction has dealt with on-line defamation, that is to say, to what extent the Japanese court regulates on-line defamatory comments made by the ordinary people. A third step will be to examine the efficacy of such an approach, and the final step will be to examine whether the UK court can learn a lesson from the Japanese jurisdiction. The author will draw upon Japanese jurisprudence, in order to consider whether a valuable lesson might be offered to the UK jurisdiction.     

The online defamation maze: are we finding a way out?

The main purpose of this paper is to examine the efficacy of the first decision that explored online defamation (as opposed to offline defamation) delivered by the Supreme Court of Japan. A discussion of the future implications of the case is then undertaken. The paper supports the First Instance (the Tokyo District Court) decision and its approach, and argues that such an approach might have provided greater implications for the future. The author also argues that the Tokyo District Court seems to have taken a more reflective view on the fluidity of online defamation and the nature of the online environment, and shows a degree of willingness to accept and incorporate such a nature. The author concludes that the Tokyo District Court's approach, although it could be seen as rather radical and extreme, seems to be more persuasive than that of the Supreme Court. It also submits that the court might have brought a more balanced and healthy outcome for the beneficiaries, including not only the claimants, the defendants, but also society as a whole. It is the case that innocent internet users can potentially be both the passive and active recipients of the information (i.e. comments posted on webpage). Before a detailed analysis and examination of the case is undertaken, a brief outline of how Japanese law and its jurisprudence have dealt with the traditional form of defamation (i.e. offline defamation) is provided as background.     

网络诽谤行为的法律规制及其完善

利用互联网全新媒体实施诽谤与传统诽谤相比较具有新的特点,寻求网络言论自由与保护名誉权、隐私权的平衡成为了网络时代更为突出的问题．网络诽谤责任主体具有多元性。网络诽谤法律规制应从适度区分公众人物与非公众人物,赋予新闻媒体的合理报道权,适度规定网络服务提供者的相应责任,实际损害赔偿、精神损害赔偿与惩罚性赔偿相结合等角度加以完善．     

What makes an international institution work for labor activists? Shaping international law through strategic litigation

Studies on international legal mobilization often analyze the mobilization efforts of activists at a single international court. Yet we know little about how activists choose among multiple international institutions to advance social justice claims. Drawing on comparative case studies of Turkish and British trade union activists' legal mobilization efforts and case law analysis, I show that activists, guided by their lawyers, probe multiple avenues to identify the legal institution with the highest judicial authority and is most responsive to activists' claims. Once they identify their target institution, the iterative process between a responsive court and activists' strategic litigation can build a court's jurisprudence in a new issue area, even if the court provides limited de jure rights protections. Activists primarily use international litigation strategy to leverage structural reforms at the domestic level and to set new international norms through precedents.     

刑法学发展报告

改革开放以后,我国刑法学发展迅速,在经历了复苏阶段、展开阶段、繁荣阶段后进入推进阶段,并取得斐然战绩。2004年的刑法学研究更是基础理论研究成果迭出,研究视野更加开阔,外向型刑法研究与犯罪学研究引人瞩目,学术活动异常活跃。当然,理论研究中的重复与浪费现象、刑事法学研究各学科发展不平衡和研究方法与研究视域的拓展亦需引起关注。未来刑法学的发展还将彻底转变刑法观念,建立法治国的刑法文化;适应时代发展需要,完善现有的刑法学体系,加大外向型刑法的研究力度,在加强判例研究、密切关注实践要求等方向上前进。     

Reductio Ad Absurdum: The Kapo Trial Judgements’ Contribution To International Criminal Law Jurisprudence And Customary International Law

Several Jewish persons designated as concentration camp guards (Kapos) during the Holocaust were subsequently tried in Israel in the 1950s and 1960s for allegedly committing grave crimes. This article examines these trial judgements and considers their significance to international criminal law jurisprudence and customary international law. First, this article will delineate the trial judgements’ purpose, relevance and previous contribution to customary international law. Secondly, a comparative narrative of the judgements with recent case law from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court will illuminate their potential contribution, specifically to the principles of modes of liability, criminal intent, and the defence of duress. The Kapo trial judgements may therefore continue to offer an extreme case example and a worthy source of common law for international criminal law jurisprudence and customary international law.     

Liberalizing British Defamation Law: A Case of Importing the First Amendment?

Regardless of whether American law tends to be too outlying to be relevant to the rest of the world, the U.S. free speech jurisprudence is more impactful than ever. Indeed, the United States remains a real-life laboratory for other countries in resolving clashes between press freedom and reputation. Jameel v. Wall Street Journal Europe and other recent English media libel cases are a good illustration. This article examines the liberalization of U.K. defamation law in connection with the U.S. actual malice rule while noting English courts' significant adoption of neutral reportage, which American courts consider to be less viable as a libel defense. The principle of functionality informs the article's analytical framework.     

刑法解释的常识化

条文解释的常识化和学理研究的经验化,是我国刑法学发展过程中出现的一个显著特点。刑法学中的所谓“常识化”大致有两种不同的表述形式:一是刑法解释上的“公众认同”,二是所谓的“社会相当性”。刑法解释常识化是实现法律认识统一性的基础,是实现刑法公正与效率有机结合的重要条件,也是实现刑法目的的重要手段。但是,运用常识化方法解决法律适用问题,必须面对的问题是如何协调该方法中内在的矛盾关系,即常识与专业之间的关系、科学解释与效力解释之间的关系。在我国目前的刑法解释中,需要走出将生活常识等同于专业知识、以感性经验替代科学理论的误区。     

Clashing conceptions of press duties: Public journalists and the courts

This article bridges the growing, but controversial, public journalism movement with First Amendment jurisprudence and libel law. It examines whether the movement finds support in laws that affect the press and, in particular, in court‐created defenses and privileges that protect journalists in modern defamation law. Do defenses that safeguard journalists in their traditional routines as fact gatherers and reporters also protect them in the kinds of roles and duties envisioned by public journalism advocates? Furthermore, has the United States Supreme Court, in non‐defamation cases involving the First Amendment, expressed concern for protecting what might be called the “public journalism functions” of the press? Does the Court create a different image for the press than the one envisioned by public journalism advocates? This article addresses these questions. It ultimately concludes that public journalists and courts have two very different conceptions about the role that journalists play in a democracy.     

AWAITING THE CROWN'S PLEASURE The Case of Daniel M'Naughton

This article seeks to place the Daniel M'Naughton case in its political context: to argue that the court's verdict of insanity cannot be satisfactorily understood unless it is recognized that Daniel M'Naughton was apolitical criminal. The insanity verdict served to discredit M'Naughton and the political ideas he represented by interpreting his act as the product of a diseased mind. The widespread political problems that the Tory government was experiencing throughout Britain were reduced to a personal problem plaguing Daniel M'Naughton. By regarding Daniel M'Naughton as a criminal lunatic incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, the court indicated that the explanation for his behavior would have to be sought in medical or psychiatric terms instead of in political terms.     

Fundamental rights in the EU after Kadi and Al Barakaat

This article takes stock of the emerging scholarship on the European Court of Justice's 2008 Kadi decision and seeks to make sense of the court's apparent evasiveness towards international law. The article argues that Kadi is best understood as an act of civil disobedience prompted by the UN Security Council's misapplication of foundational principles of the international order. In turn, the court's forceful articulation of the stakes in this case signals a prioritisation of basic rights within the supranational constitutional architectonic. In this respect, the ‘domestic’ constitutional implications of Kadi are just as far reaching as its consequences for the EU's status as an actor under international law.     

刑法方法理论的若干基本问题

刑法方法与具体问题相联系,属于刑法学研究的内容;刑法方法论与世界观相联系,一般地属于法理学研究的内容。每一种方法都有自己的功能,也有自己的局限性,仅仅使用一种方法是无法完整地研究刑法学的。在现代刑法理论的构建中,比较研究方法是值得我国学者特别重视的方法,体系性方法是最重要的方法之一,刑法理想对刑法方法的选择具有根本性的指引作用。从总体上说,综合的方法才是最好的刑法方法。     

中国近代刑法学的诞生与成长

在中国 ,虽然很早就诞生了刑事法律 ,也很早就出现了研究这些法律的律学。但在中国古代 ,并没有刑法学这门学科。近代意义上的刑法学是在吸收消化近代西方资产阶级刑法学的基础上 ,逐步诞生及成长的。本文分三个方面 ,试图对这一过程作一些描述 ,对在此过程中发挥重要作用的若干部代表作进行评述 ,并对其基本特征以及对中国现代刑法学的影响进行阐述     

Affirmed: A Study of Criminal Appeals and Decision-Making Norms in a California Court of Appeal

The work of state intermediate appellate courts is often described as “correcting legal errors” and “supervising” trial courts. But what do these labels mean in practice? This article explores the intermediate appellate process through a study of criminal appeals in a California Court of Appeal. Part I describes the characteristics and dispositions of criminal appeals. Contrary to popular impression, a conviction was reversed in only about 5 percent of these appeals. To explain the low reversal rate, part II draws upon interviews with justices of the Court of Appeal to examine the institutional norms and perspectives guiding the court's decisions. The basic decision norms described by the justices are norms of affirmance: for example, the harmless error rule and the substantial evidence rule incline the court to affirm despite certain legal errors or factual questions. Moreover, the particularistic approach the court typically takes in its decision making apparently sensitizes it to the substantive characteristics prevailing in criminal appeals: the crimes are serious and there is little doubt about factual guilt. The low reversal rate and the analysis of the court's norms suggest that intermediate appellate review of criminal convictions is narrower and more constrained than the “error correction” and “supervision” labels imply. Part III explores the implications of the case study for appellate policy.     

“Error But Without Malice” in Defamation of Public Officials: The Value of Free Expression in International Human Rights Law

Government officials in various parts of the world use defamation to silence critics, but defamation liability may curtail freedom of expression on topics of public interest and undermine human rights generally. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees freedom of expression unless a state can show need to protect individual reputation and acts proportionally. In its adjudication of complaints for violations of Article 19, and in its General Comment 34, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has crafted the principle that defamation liability may not be imposed if an erroneous statement about a public official was made in “error but without malice.” Although soft law, General Comment 34 represents the committee's most compelling articulation of the values animating freedom of expression in international human rights law, and chief among the values is the role played by free expression to promote realization of all human rights.     

The Protection of Reputation in Japan: A Systematic Analysis of Defamation Cases

Although Japanese defamation law has been a subject of legal interest for scholars and judges, their main focus was the defamation rules that appeared in cases publicized by legal reporters. The following study coded 232 defamation cases against the media that were decided in district courts in Japan, according to the type of database that reported the cases. Statistical results reveal that newspapers are more likely to report defamation cases than other databases because stories about defamation cases may satisfy readers' interest or because the newspaper might have been informed by plaintiffs who won their cases. The results also show that the professional status of the plaintiff is a predictor of the case outcome. Politicians and officials are less likely to win in defamation cases than are executives and criminals, and they received lower damages than athletes and entertainers.     

"The Firebrand of My Youth": Holmes,Emerson and Freedom of Expression

There is probably no figure in American jurisprudence who has been more studied and whose record has been more analyzed than Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Among the aspects of Holmes' career that have commonly piqued the interest of scholars is the apparent transformation of Holmes' views of the First Amendment and freedom of expression rights. In 1919, Holmes began a redirection of the United States Supreme Court in its interpretation of these rights with a dissenting opinion in which he set forth a broader approach than what had previously been used-and what Holmes himself had previously held. Why the transformation in Holmes? It is posited in this article that the philosophy that had been simmering in Holmes rose to the surface in 1919. It is a philosophy of individualism and non-conformity. In short, it is Ralph Waldo Emerson's philosophy of self-reliance.