Democratising the separation of powers in EU government: The case for presidentialism

The EU, while not a state, can be conceived as a mixed or compound political system. Capturing its character of separation of powers has implications for understanding what the EU polity is, but also should be, not least from a democratic standpoint. Hence, the article addresses the EU as system of government in order to identify one appropriate path of democratisation. It first revisits separation of powers and the typology of parliamentary and presidential government to delineate criteria for categorising horizontal (i.e. between branches) division‐of‐powers arrangements. To this end, it elaborates in particular the criteria proposed by Steffani which allow for a more parsimonious differentiation between types of governments. Subsequently, the EU polity (e.g. its structure and functioning of separation of powers and “checks and balances”) is assessed regarding its conformity to a government type. Finally, I discuss implications for identifying a more certain point of reference for an approach to democratise EU government that is not only institutionally compatible, but also ‘demos enabling’.     

完善我国破产管理人监督机制的构想

完善的监督机制是破产管理人公正、公平履行职责的保障,且其作为一项成功的法律制度已在国外实施多年。但迄今这样的监督机制在我国破产法中尚未形成。在比较分析国内外破产管理人监督机制的基础上,提出:我国应增设专门化的监督机关———监督人;赋予监督主体必要的监督权利,建立破产管理人的“重大事项”报告制度;明确划分监督主体的监督权限,构建和谐通畅的监督机体。     

试论国内仲裁司法监督的范围

独立性和一裁终局性体现了仲裁制度的基本精神,仲裁裁决由于其准司法特点,也必然受制于国家司法权力的监督和制约。我国《仲裁法》所建构的对国内仲裁进行实体性和程序性全面司法监督的体制,在现实中存在监督不当的可能,更重要的是与仲裁制度本质以及与民事诉讼机制平衡关系等存在抵触。从制度构建的角度来讲,应改而确立司法对仲裁的程序性监督机制,保证司法机制和仲裁机制在民商事纠纷处理机制上的平衡关系。     

军事立法监督研究

军事立法权源于人民,其立法过程及结果理应受到包括国家最高权力机关、社会团体、公民在内的一切组织和个人的监督和控制。本文分析了当前军事立法监督机制中存在的诸多问题,并提出了若干建议。     

The Role of Supervising Judges in the Granting of Parole in France: A Critical Evaluation

Since World War II, France has sought to decentralize and individualize its correctional system. The major change in the process was the creation of a new judicial role, that of Supervising Judge, who would incorporate both judicial and correctional roles. Until 1972, paroles were granted solely by the Ministry of Justice in Paris. But following legislative reforms in 1970 and 1972, Supervising Judges were given increased responsibilities in these matters. As a result there has been an increase in the total number of paroles awarded since 1972.

The hoped-for reforms met with strong opposition from correctional authorities, who perceived Supervising Judges as usurping their authority. The reforms were also opposed by some trial judges who saw them as interfering with the traditional role of courts, particularly in the sentencing of offenders. The ambiguous nature of the role itself, neither clearly administrative nor clearly judicial, has contributed to the problem in the development of the institution.

A major weakness in the present system is the lack of a strong administrative infrastructure which prevents Supervising Judges from operating effectively. Few judges are assisted by counselors, parole officers, or even clerks, who are a necessary part of carrying out such broad responsibilities. Supervising Judges have been the target of public criticisms for “coddling” criminals. Since they have little independence within the judiciary, their ability to function without government pressure is limited. There is, therefore, a temptation on the part of many to play it “safe” in order not to displease the public and the judicial hierarchy. While the survival of the role itself does not appear in danger, it may be limited by further legislative restriction of its authority.     

The United States Congress and nuclear war powers: explaining legislative nonfeasance

Scholarly debate over the role of the United States Congress in approving military action has focused on the respective war powers granted the executive and legislature by the United States Constitution. Although a voluminous literature has examined the institutional and partisan politics shaping their exercise, a conspicuous lacuna concerns nuclear war powers. Despite periodic but mostly ineffective reassertions of congressional prerogatives over war, the decision to employ nuclear weapons has been left entirely to presidential discretion since 1945. Explaining this consistent refusal by Congress to rein in the ultimate presidential power and exercise co-responsibility for the most devastating form of war relies less on disputatious constitutional grounds than on three arguments about congressional dysfunctionality, legislative irresponsibility, and the relative costs of collective action by federal lawmakers on perilous national security questions.     

The empty place of European power: Contested democracy and the technocratic threat

In this article, I analyse the European Union (EU) in the light of the Lefortian question: What place does power have in a democracy? Claude Lefort has argued that modern democracy is a regime where the place of power is empty. In this article, I investigate what this entails for the EU. I take the current situation of democracy in the EU as being marked by two developments: the contestation of democracy by citizens on the one hand and the hollowing out of democracy at the EU level on the other. Exemplary for the first development are the popular protest movements known as the indignados. The second feature is exemplified by governance and technocracy. My argument suggests that the critical response of the former to the latter can in fact be read as the claim that what should have been the empty place of power in European democracy has come to be occupied by the establishment of an authoritarian regime of expert rule.     

The law of concentrations of crime at place: the case of Tel Aviv-Jaffa

Weisburd, Groff, and Yang argue that there is a ‘law of concentrations of crime at place’ within cities. In this paper, we provide a test for this proposition in Tel Aviv-Jaffa. We found that crime concentrations at street segments in 2010 were remarkably similar to those observed in American cities. About 4.5% of the street segments produced approximately 50% of the crime, and about 1% of street segments produced 25% of crime. Our study provides important verification of the broad applicability of the law of crime concentrations at place.     

利益平衡视角下我国督促程序之保障机制研究

我国督促程序在制度设计上对债权人和债务人利益保护的不均衡导致了在司法实践中督促程序适用率低下。从当事人之间利益平衡的司法正义观出发,须从债权人释明义务的构建、保全程序适用的可能性以及在明确生效支付令具有既判力的基础上,构建债务人提起再审以及案外第三人提起第三人撤销之诉等程序保障机制入手,完善我国督促程序的程序保障机制,从而充分发挥督促程序的制度设计目的,实现新的变革。     

Supervising the Implementation of Legislation on Land Use

For a long time, land use in the Russian Federation (RF) lacked a proper legal foundation. On October 30, 2001, the Land Code of the Russian Federation entered into force. In many respects it has facilitated a positive solution to questions of land use. The experience of application of the law accumulated over the period of its effect was analyzed by the procurators of subjects of the Federation, who in the first half of 2003 on the instructions of the General Procuracy of the RF conducted a verification of the implementation of the Land Code of the RF.