法国刑事证据自由原则及其限制

法国刑事证据自由原则,即将证据能力与证据形式作一清楚切割,允许通过任何形式证明犯罪事实。证据形式自由与证据评估自由及法官依据内心确信裁判的伦理责任一道构成自由心证制度体系。法国证据自由原则历经古典时期的萌芽、中世纪的式微、法国大革命的确立及现代发展四个阶段。法国确立证据自由原则的合理依据是刑事诉讼的特殊属性、提高打击犯罪效率的需要及揭示案件真相的要求。合法性及正当性是对证据自由原则的限制。法国通过立法及判例规定了对主要取证手段的限制,如讯问犯罪嫌疑人、搜查与扣押、电信截听及诱惑侦查。程序无效制度保证限制的有效性,通过程序性制裁形成威慑力。正当性的灵活性及程序无效的偶发性使得法国在刑事证据上从加强“限制”重回“自由”,达成新的平衡。重视“实体真实”始终是法国刑事司法最为核心的价值,这不啻为中国当前完善刑事证据制度提供新的启发。     

浅析法之正当性

本文从各种角度说明了法的正当性问题。首先阐述了法的正当性的含义,其次,从法的正当性的本质属性——正义角度论述了法的正当性问题。最后,从法正当性的体现——实体正当和程序正当角度再次说明了法之正当性。     

浅析生态人理论的伦理支持

人性处在不断变化、发展和完善之中,人性的进化必然同时带动了法的价值变化。生态人代表了人性在环境时代的一次全新展现和发展,它最终带来了法的安全、平等和自由价值的变迁。本文将阐述生态人这一进步理论背后的伦理支撑。     

论惩罚的政治正当性

报应主义与功利主义为惩罚提供了道德正当性证成,但在民主的价值多元社会,道德的正当性是一回事,如何促成政治实践是另外一回事。因此,在惩罚的道德证成之外,有必要开辟惩罚的政治证成道路。近代社会契约论者提供了不同的政治证成进路,当代契约论者罗尔斯提出自由主义的正当性原则。根据罗尔斯方案,国家惩罚制度的合理性在于公民的理性而非某个道德原则,应该保留犯罪者的公民身份,合理限制犯罪者的权利,死刑是不可证的。     

经济自由与经济刑法正当性的体系思考

我国经济刑法的肥大化是半市场半统制过渡经济体制和政府主导经济发展模式投射于刑法的结果。刑法的根本目的在于法益保护,秩序不具有成为刑法法益的当然性。在自由经济社会,经济犯罪的法益应当是经济自由,但在国家经济管制的背景下,经济刑法的范围最终是经济自由与经济管制调和、平衡的产物。没有具体法益侵害的场合,国家要慎重以危害经济秩序为由,将一定的行为规定或认定为犯罪。国家对经济刑法范围的设定要秉持开放的态度,避免刑法蜕变为经济发展和经济体制改革的阻碍力量。保护经济自由,保障我国市场经济的健康发展,是我国经济刑法发展的未来。     

论著作权限制之正当性

著作权限制的正当性可以从著作权的限制、利益平衡、权利义务统一、智力作品创作过程及国家经济水平关系等层面加以分析。本文通过剖析著作权限制的正当性,以帮助深刻认识著作权法的价值构造和著作权法的立法宗旨。     

契约伦理与权利的正当性

权利以伦理为基础,从而获得了正当性。市场经济的运行推动了中国从传统等级伦理观转向契约伦理观的诉求。权利的伦理基础发生了变迁,权利也必然要发生变化和发展。无论是从道德角度,还是从法律角度探求契约伦理与权利的正当性关系,都具有重要的理论意义和现实意义。     

诱惑侦查的正当性及其适用限制

权利对权力体制的构建是现代国家的逻辑起点,也是权力行使的边界。以社会契约论为核心,通过权利让渡、防御救济、刑罚目的等方面可看出诱惑侦查在法律上和道德上皆具正当性。当然,作为"必要的恶",符合必要性标准、比例标准、意志自由标准和法定程序标准是其正当适用的应有之义。     

契约自由及其限制

法国一八0四年民法，系基于政治上之个人主义及经济上之放任主义，故于契约自由之原则，十分拥护。民法第六条，谓：凡不违背公共秩序及善良风俗之契约，均可缔结。条文只说明反面之限制，未列举正面之条件，此民法规定之与刑法不相同者。近年民治思想发达，由人民直接选举议员，制定法律。故现在之法律，乃一大多数意思表示之综合。个人之利害关系，不及社会之利害关系为重要，而契约自由遂亦屡受限制矣。     

Positional Asphyxia without Active Restraint Following an Assault

Deaths due to positional asphyxia are most often accidental, associated with alcohol and/or drug intoxication. A 19‐year‐old male is reported who was assaulted and placed in a head‐down position in the back of a car were he was later found dead. Brush abrasions indicated that he had been dragged to the vehicle. The head and right shoulder were wedged into the foot well with the body uppermost. At autopsy, there was marked congestion of the face, neck, and upper chest with conjunctival ecchymoses, bruising of the face and scalp, focal subarachnoid hemorrhage, minor cerebral contusion, and diffuse cerebral swelling with early hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE). Toxicology was negative. Death was attributed to HIE resulting from the unusual positioning of the body. Cases of positional asphyxia involving others may not always include restraint, and when encountered should initiate a careful evaluation of the possible events and lethal pathophysiological processes.     

从以道德立论的自由到以利益立论的自由——卢梭自由观与马克思早期自由观初探

卢梭和马克思都是思想史上的重要人物。但是长期以来,人们对卢梭与马克思的思想联系关注较少。本文试图通过对卢梭自由观与马克思早期自由观的简要介绍,阐明卢梭与马克思之间的思想联系。卢梭和马克思都对本体论意义上的自由和积极自由予以了关注,但他们对自由与法律的关系和自由、道德与利益的关系的论述却存在差异。     

人才流动法律约束机制研究

人才流动既是人的一项自由权利,也是人才这种人力资本作为资源的市场配置方式。但是,无论作为一项自由权利还是作为资源的市场配置方式,对其进行适当的约束都有其理论与现实的正当性,因此需要建立相应的法律机制。     

关于未决羁押场所的思考

未决羁押场所涉及到被告人人权保护;对此进行解构与建构必须建立在客观基础之上。该基础就是砌筑社会共识。     

Freedom of Speech as an Expressive Mode of Existence

This paper adopts Deleuze’s reading of Spinoza’s expressionism and pure semiotics to argue that Spinoza’s Ethics offers an alternative notion of freedom of speech that is based on the potentia of the individual. Its aim is to show how freedom of thought is connected to the problem of individuation that connects our mode of being with our power to speak and think. Rather than treating freedom of speech as an enlightened idea that is in opposition to, for example, religious authority, or the suppression of human rights, this paper argues that freedom of speech should be understood by what Spinoza calls ‘an adequate idea’: an idea that explains the cause of its own production. What is to be considered is: who wants this freedom, in what situation, why, what is at stake? No freedom in itself is ever given. This paper argues for speech as an assembled body that is always in connection with other bodies. It is argued that to understand the power and value of the freedom of speech, we should study the praxis of the utterance as an assembled body, its causal dimensions, and its affective immanent relations with other bodies, and other modes of speaking.     

The Autonomy Rationale for Religious Freedom

Courts and scholars across jurisdictions increasingly identify personal autonomy as the primary rationale for the right to religious freedom. But there are tensions between autonomy on one hand, and religious belief, practice and proselytism on the other. This paper will focus on two tensions which have unappreciated implications for religious freedom jurisprudence, particularly that of the ECHR. The first tension stems from the resistance of some religious beliefs to revision. The second stems from the manipulative nature of some modes of religious proselytism. This paper argues that, given these tensions, the protection currently offered to religious beliefs, practices and proselytism by the right to religious freedom cannot be justified by reference to the value of autonomy. This finding has significant implications for the justification of the right to religious freedom.     

司法意识形态:能动与克制的反思

能动司法在中国有多种意义,但其基本的含义是超于法律和职权进行司法活动。能动司法因与法治的基本要求不吻合因而不宜作为司法理念,只能作为法律方法层面灵活处理案件的姿态。能动司法不可避免,但对其不能放任,而应该约束。最近提出的能动司法得到了很多赞赏,接受程度很高,这是有历史原因的,当然也是值得警惕的。在依法治国建设社会主义法治国的进程中,能动司法会不会冲击这一方略是我们必须研究的。我国的法治建设刚刚起步,经不起能动司法的折腾。     

Please Don't Use Science or Mathematics in Arguing for Human Rights or Natural Law

In the vast literature on human rights and natural law one finds arguments that draw on science or mathematics to support claims to universality and objectivity. Here are two such arguments: 1) Human rights are as universal (i.e., valid independently of their specific historical and cultural Western origin) as the laws and theories of science; and 2) principles of natural law have the same objective (metahistorical) validity as mathematical principles. In what follows I will examine these arguments in some detail and argue that both are misplaced. A section of the paper will be devoted to a discussion of arguments relying on the historical and cultural specificity (and intrinsic superiority) of Western science. The conclusion is that both science and mathematics offer little help to anyone wanting to make use of them as paradigms of universality, objectivity, and rationality. Finally, I will draw some consequences for the idea of human rights.     

试论社区矫正人身拘束机制

随着社区矫正制度被正式载入我国刑法，区县司法行政机关在未来社区矫正工作中的执法主体地位备受关注。作为刑罚的非监禁执行方式，社区矫正始终面临着两大任务：一是保障社区安全；二是降低重新违法犯罪率。二者的实现都有赖于强有力的矫正手段作为基础，势必应建立起一种针对社区服刑人员人身的约束保障机制，以确保在社区安全的前提下，提高矫正的实际效果。     

合同自由的歧视性限制——房地产“限购令”的民法透视

无论房价高企是否源于投机性购房,借助身份控制的任何限购行为都具有可非难性。商品房买卖合同的缔约权基于户籍而实现,户籍由公共产品的差异性分配机制变成民事权利的取得资格,构成对合同自由的歧视性限制。限购令颁布后,户籍审查成为商品房买卖合同产生物权变动的形式要件,合同当事人因合同目的落空享有法定解除权,而房屋名义所有权人与真实所有权人不一致的情形随之激增;建议未解除买卖合同的被限购对象以保障将来债权为由,申请办理预告登记。