法官分配证明责任:一个法学迷思概念的分析

我国司法实务及理论界多数学者普遍认为法官分配证明责任是对法定证明责任分配规则的补充,是事实认定陷入困境的疑难案件的证明责任分配规则.本文试图剖析这一误解的形成原因,并指出法官裁量分配证明责任在大陆法系证明责任一般分配理论中是没有存在地位的,我国民事证明责任分配应采取并实际上是采取了规范说,因此不宜赋予法官实质上分配证明责任的权力.实践中所谓法官分配证明责任的做法都是对这一概念的误用并可造成滥用自由裁量权的后果.应继续明确证明责任分配的法定规则,并通过强化当事人的证明权及在司法实践中逐渐形成与积累诉讼证明与事实认定的具体规则解决事实疑难案件的证明难题.     

浅议民事诉讼证明责任的分配

在民事诉讼中,证明责任是民事诉讼的核心,而证明责任的分配则是核心中的核心。证明责任的分配与当事人的程序利益和实体利益密切相关,其分配规则不仅需要一般规则,还需要特殊的补充规则,甚至需要法官的自由裁量。本文主要论述了证明责任分配的相关学说以及我国证明责任分配的原则,最后阐述了法官自由裁量权在民事诉讼证明责任分配中的适用。     

论消费欺诈诉讼案件证明难题的化解路径——以一个《最高人民法院公报》案例为样本的分析

消费欺诈诉讼案件中对欺诈事实的证明责任分配依规范说应由消费者承担,不应由法官裁量证明责任来改变法定的证明责任分配。法官自由裁量权应在证明评价与自由心证等环节加以运用。疑难案件的解决应坚持在严格遵循法定证明责任分配原则的基础上,通过司法实践生成诉讼证明的具体规则的路径来加以解决。     

事实认定中的法官自由裁量权

司法过程中的法官自由裁量权体现了司法能动性。在事实认定过程中,不论是证明责任的分配、证据能力的确定或是证明力的判断,都不可避免地带有法官自由裁量的成分,如何赋予法官在事实认定过程中一定的自由裁量空间以更好地发现真实又通过合理的检验机制以有效抑制法官自由裁量权的滥用。是我国立法与司法中面临的重要课题。     

论消费欺诈诉讼案件证明难题的化解路径——以一个《最高人民法院公报》案例为样本的分析

消费欺诈诉讼案件中对＂欺诈＂事实的证明责任分配依＂规范说＂应由消费者承担,不应由法官裁量证明责任来改变法定的证明责任分配。法官自由裁量权应在证明评价与自由心证等环节加以运用。疑难案件的解决应坚持在严格遵循法定证明责任分配原则的基础上,通过司法实践生成诉讼证明的具体规则的路径来加以解决。     

正视与反思:证明责任分配中自由裁量权的失范与规制

我国《民事诉讼法》第六十四条第一款明确了"谁主张,谁举证"的证明责任的一般原则,最高人民法院《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第七条则赋予法官在无法律、司法解释的具体规定下,允许法官自由裁量证明责任的分配。由于立法之法无法穷尽纠纷的类型,赋予法官在符合一定条件下行使裁量权来分配案件的证明责任具有现实意义。但最高人民法院《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第七条的规定过于原则,法官在行使自由裁量权分配证明责任时亦面临着挑战。基于此,本文试从证明责任分配中自由裁量权存在的合理性入手,结合典型案例,深入剖析自由裁量权失范的现象及成因,强化对规制法官在行使自由裁量权分配证明责任的制度考察,提出合理的制度构想。     

我国民事证明责任分配的理性重构——事实真伪不明时法官的抉择

证明责任的分配,实质上就是法律对客观证明责任的预先配置。综合考量实体与程序所追求的公平正义、诚实信用、权利保护等宏观价值观以及中国实践的土壤,和证明责任分配规则适用主体审判之法官的习惯操作流程之切合度,及法律职业群体的司法水平,德国学者罗森贝克的"规范说"应是目前我国确立证明责任分配规则标准的主要理论依据。同时考虑法官裁判的身份行为以及法的安定性和可预测性,证明责任分配规则适用时应禁止法官自由裁量权的行使。     

规范法官自由裁量权问题研究

法官的自由裁量是司法过程中经常发生的现象。但是,作为涉及到法官主观意志的活动,在法治社会本身是"以规则为中心的法律秩序"的前提诉求下,法官自由裁量权的合理性或者正当性经常受到质疑。尤其在我国的背景下,是否赋予法官自由裁量权、法官究竟     

证据制度中法官自由裁量权的类型化分析

法官的自由裁量权是现代证据制度的必要组成部分。这种裁量权可以分为开放型与封闭型两种基本类别。开放型裁量将价值判断引入司法证明的过程中，使诉讼证明区别于纯粹的科学证明。封闭型裁量则以维护立法在逻辑上的一致性为目标，追求司法证明的确定性和可预见性。对两种自由裁量之间关系的不同处理，导致了司法证明在灵活性、判决结果的合法化等方面的差异。我国应当将“以开放的体系追求证据制度在逻辑上的统一”作为证据制度的发展目标，以此确保诉讼证明的和谐性与确定性之间的统一。     

试探规范法官自由裁量权

法官的自由裁量权是法官在多种可能被合法选择适用的法律规则中合理地选择其一,或者是在没有明确规则可以供适用的时候详细阐述裁决理由的权力。籍于部分法官滥用自由裁量权的情形,应当意识到禁止甚至否认法官自由裁量权是毫无意义的,如何消除法官自由裁量行为失范和规范法官自由裁量行为才是问题的关键。文章试图从法官内在素养、自由裁量权的行使环境、对法官自由裁量权的监督这三方面来探讨如何规范法官行使自由裁量权。     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.     

Monks Who Have Sex: Pārājika Penance in Indian Buddhist Monasticisms

In the study of Buddhism it is commonly accepted that a monk or nun who commits a pārājika offence is permanently and irrevocably expelled from the Buddhist monastic order. This view is based primarily on readings of the Pāli Vinaya. With the exception of the Pāli Vinaya, however, all other extant Buddhist monastic law codes (Dharmaguptaka, Mahāsāṅghika, Mahīśāsaka, Sarvāstivāda and Mūlasarvāstivāda) contain detailed provisions for monks and nuns who commit pārājikas but nevertheless wish to remain within the saṅgha. These monastics are not expelled. Rather, they are granted a special status known as the śikṣādattaka. In this paper I explore the rules. concerning pārājika penance and the śikṣādattaka with specific regard to monastic celibacy. Given that five out of six extant law codes recognise this remarkable accommodation to the rule of celibacy, I argue that we must look to Vinayas other than the Pāli Vinaya if we are to arrive at a nuanced and representative view of Indian Buddhist monasticism.

Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.)

     

Family breakdown and the ‘Welfare Child’ in 19th and 20th century Britain

This article traces new cycles of interest in past children as distinct from past childhood. Recent work highlighting that a conceptualisation of childhood existed even in periods with few written records closes the chapter begun by Philippe Ariès in 1960. Instead, there has been a new surge of interest in children on the edges of family life, as well as children in similarly liminal positions between the worlds of adults and children: runaways, delinquents and orphans. Several themes in the literature are identified, based on the conflicting ideas of ‘body/mind’, ‘victim/threat’, ‘needs/rights’. It is noted that researchers are using more imaginative ways of reaching the lived experience of children than the family or institutional framework, and that an increasing link is drawn between historical and modern concerns such as child abuse and the care of ‘at risk’ children.     

Vedic Language and Vaiṣṇava Theology:Madhva’s Use of Nirukta in his Ṛgbhāṣya

This article explores the way in which Madhva (1238–1317), the founder of the Dvaita Vedānta system of Hindu thought, reformulates the traditional exegetic practice of nirukta or “word derivation” to validate his pluralistic, hierarchical, and Vaiṣṇava reading of the Ṛgvedic hymns. Madhva’s Ṛgbhāṣya (RB) is conspicuous for its heavy reliance on and unique deployment of this exegetical tactic to validate several key features of his distinctive theology. These features include his belief in Viṣṇu’s unique possession of all perfect attributes (guṇaparipūrṇatva) and His related conveyability by all Vedic words (sarvaśabdavācyatva). Such an understanding of Vedic language invokes the basic nirukta presupposition that words are eternally affiliated with the meanings they convey. But it is also based onMadhva’s access to a lexicon entitled Vyāsa’s Nirukti with which his critics and perhaps even his commentators seem to be unfamiliar.While the precise status of this text is the subject of ongoing debate, Madhva’s possession of special insight into the sacred canon is established in part by his unique claim to be an avatāra of the wind god Vāyu and a direct disciple of Viṣṇu Himself in the form of Vyāsa₁. Thus, Madhva’s use of nirukta invokes his personal charisma to challenge not only conventional understandings of the hymns but traditional exegetic norms. Madhva’s provision of an alternative tradition of nirukta provoked sectarian debate throughout the Vijayanagara period over the extent to which one could innovate in established practices of reading the Veda. Articulating the Veda’s precise authority was a key feature of Brahmin debates during this period and reflects both the empire’s concern with promoting a shared religious ideology and the competition among rival Brahman sects for imperial patronage that this concern elicited. By looking at how two of Madhva’s most important commentators (the 14^th-century Jayatīrtha and the 17^th-century Rāghavendra) sought to defend his niruktis, this article will explore how notions of normative nirukta were articulated in response to Madhva’s deviations. At the same time, however, examining Madhva’s commentators’ defense of his niruktis also demonstrates the extent to which Madhva actually adhered to selected exegetic norms. This reveals that discomfort with Madhva’s particular methods for deriving words stemmed, in part, from a more general ambivalence towards this exegetical tactic whose inherent open-endedness threatened to undermine the fixity of the canon’s very substance: its language. Vyāsa’s Nirukti is one of several ”unknown sources” cited in Madhva’s commentaries whose exact status continues to be debated. Some scholars (e.g. Rao, Sharma, Siauve) maintain that these texts are part of a now lost Pāṅcarātra tradition that Madhva is attempting to preserve. This may be true for many of these citations. However, in addition to claiming to be both an avatāra of Vāyu and Viṣṇu-as-Vyāsa’s student, Madhva states in several places (e.g., VTN 42, RB 162) that the canon has suffered loss during transmission and that only Viṣṇu can reveal it in its entirety. Thus, it is possible that Madhva intends texts like Vyāsa’s Nirukti to be viewed as part of an ongoing and corrective revelation, a notion that is compatible with many Vaiṣṇava traditions (Halbfass, 1991: 4).     

Policing Outlawed Desire: ‘Homocriminality’ in Beat Spaces in Australia

Drawing on interview data of gay men who have had their behavior in public spaces scrutinised by agents of the law for signs deviance, this article explores the historical characteristics of police animosity towards such conduct in Australia. This entails examining encounters between police and gay men who pursue desire in ‘beat’ (or ‘cottage’ to the use the UK term) spaces. Exploring why these outlaw gay male subjects are so abject and troubling to the law, the discussion documents how law’s desire to regulate gay men plays out in the masquerade of ‘plain-clothes’ agent provocateur operations where police entrap gay men by mimicking gay bodily appearances, gestures and mannerisms. This article also examines how police regulation of gay desire functions as a form of violence that delimits expressions of same sex desire in public spaces. A key theme that underpins the analyses in this paper is that the policing of desire in ‘beat’ spaces helps produce qualities of illicitness and dangerousness and that this, in turn, fuels the circuit of desire at play between gay men and agents of the law.

Interrupting the Myth of the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Partage</Emphasis>: Reflections on Sovereignty and Sacrifice in the work of Nancy,Agamben and Derrida

Agamben traces the bio-political essence of modern politics to the non-sacrificial killing of Homo Sacer in Roman law. Nancy, on the other hand, links the history of Western politics to the fundamental logic of sacrifice in Western metaphysics. He nevertheless contemplates the possibility that Western societies may finally have arrived at the threshold of a non-sacrificial existence. Derrida seeks to resist the sacrificial logic of Western metaphysics and politics, but nevertheless appears to accept it as an irreducible fact of human co-existence. Unlike Nancy, he envisages no actual or actualised beyond beyond the realm of sacrificial metaphysics and politics. He thus can be said to interrupt Nancy’s ‘myth’ of a non-sacrificial partage. This article compares these three philosophical stances in the hope of throwing more light on the role of sacrifice in the law and politics of our time. Professor of Law, Rand Afrikaans University. Conversations with Ann van Sevenant, Carol Clarkson, Louise du Toit, Peter Fitzpatrick, Costas Douzinas and Adam Thurschwell gave impetus to many of the themes developed in this article. Concomitant shortcomings and inaccuracies, as always, are mine.