Law/Holocaust/Academy

Book reviewed in this article:
Richard H. Weisberg, Vichy Law and the Holocaust in France     

The Common Law/Civil Law Divide: Residual Truth of a Misleading Distinction

Ⅰ.IntroductionThe contrast between common law and civil law systems of civil justice is often expressed by juxtaposing adversarial and inquisitorial models of procedure.On the conventional understanding of these two models,civil litigation in common law systems then appears as controlled by litigants who present their respectivecases to a passive judge,and its civil law counterpart as controlled by an active judge who conducts an in-quiry into the facts and the law of a dispute.But while these two contrasting models capture many salient     

两大法系错误区别中残留的真相

人们常常把对抗制和纠问制诉讼模式的不同作为西方两大法系最根本的不同点,进而依据两个模式又发现、列举出一系列衍生的区别.其中当然有正确的观点也有错误的理解.达马斯卡在本文中首先考察了自由放任时代两大法系所存在的相同点和不同点,进而跟踪之后两大法系发生的变化来甄别那些已经逐渐消失的区别,最终为我们揭示能够成为根本不同点的特...     

证据法学的启蒙——吉尔伯特的证据法思想

在证据法学学术史上,吉尔伯特对于该学科的独立有着原创性的贡献,他在经验哲学基础上建立的证据法学体系,也是英美证据法的发端.在知识社会学背景下考察,吉尔波特的思想是与当时的科学自然主义和诉讼制度的变迁相联系的,因此他的理论既有开拓性的一面,但也存在着时代的局限性.这对于我们反思英美证据法的理论基础以及理性面对中国证据立法和证据法学研究,都有着重要的启迪意义.     

证据法学的启蒙——吉尔伯特的证据法思想

在证据法学学术史上,吉尔伯特对于该学科的独立有着原创性的贡献,他在经验哲学基础上建立的证据法学体系,也是英美证据法的发端.在知识社会学背景下考察,吉尔波特的思想是与当时的科学自然主义和诉讼制度的变迁相联系的,因此他的理论既有开拓性的一面,但也存在着时代的局限性.这对于我们反思英美证据法的理论基础以及理性面对中国证据立法和证据法学研究,都有着重要的启迪意义.     

美国专利法中的不正当行为问题

不正当行为在美国专利侵权诉讼中通常被用来作为抗辩理由.根据美国专利法,所有与专利申请的起草和审查直接相关的人员,都有义务向美国专利与商标局披露与专利授权相关的重要信息.因此,若法院判定有关人员存在实质性失实陈述或疏漏行为,并有欺诈美国专利与商标局之意图,构成不正当行为,则该专利将被认定为全部无效.     

Terror and Law: German Responses to 9/11

In reaction to the 9/11 terror attacks the German Parliamentenacted a number of statutes under the auspices of the so-calledwar against terror. The repressive new legislation aims at enhancingsurveillance and control by police and intelligence agenciesby introducing, for example, new passports and ID-cards. Inorder to prevent attacks similar to those of 9/11, Parliamenteven established statutory authority to shoot down, using militaryforce, passenger planes being used as a weapon. At the sametime the Federal Public Prosecutor General has prosecuted anumber of persons as alleged supporters of the 9/11 pilots,and several others, as alleged Islamic terrorists. These forcefulreactions of both Parliament and the Public Prosecutor provedpremature and were overturned by Germany's highest courts. Thefight against terrorism has thus been shown to be bound by constitutionallaw and general principles of law; such special measures stillneed, ultimately to adhere to the rule of law.     

Law & bioethics: from values to violence.

The relationship of law of bioethics always complex, has shifted post 9/11. Instead of looking to law as protector of rights and liberties, the new bioethics approach, exemplified by the President's Council on Bioethics, deploys law as aggressor. Thus we see a call to get tough, to prohibit a range of biomedical practices, with the prospect of not only civil but criminal enforcement. Bioethicists face a grave choice, whether to embrace the use of state force to resolve bioethics debates.     

Madness and the Law: The Derrida/Foucault Debate Revisited

In this article the Derrida/Foucault debate is scrutinised with two closely related aims in mind: (1) reconsidering the way in which Foucault’s texts, and especially the more recently published lectures, should be read; and (2) establishing the relation between law and madness. The article firstly calls for a reading of Foucault which exceeds metaphysics with the security it offers, by taking account of Derrida’s reading of Foucault as well as of the heterogeneity of Foucault’s texts. The article reflects in detail on a text of Derrida on Foucault (‘Cogito and the History of Madness’) as well as a text of Foucault on Blanchot (‘Maurice Blanchot: The Thought from Outside’). The latter text shows that Foucault was at times acutely aware of the difficulty involved in exceeding metaphysics and that he realised the importance in this regard of a reflection on literature. These reflections tie in closely with Foucault’s History of Madness as well as with Derrida’s reflections on literature and on madness. Both Derrida and Foucault contend that law has much to learn from literature in understanding the relation between itself and madness. Literature more specifically points to law’s ‘origin’ in madness. The article contends that a failure to take seriously this origin, also in the reading of Foucault’s lectures, would amount to a denial by law of itself.