The Subjects of Collectively Binding Decisions: Democratic Inclusion and Extraterritorial Law

Citizenship and residency are basic conditions for political inclusion in a democracy. However, if democracy is premised on the inclusion of everyone subject to collectively binding decisions, the relevance of either citizenship or residency for recognition as a member of the polity is uncertain. The aim of this paper is to specify the conditions for being subject to collective decisions in the sense relevant to democratic theory. Three conceptions of what it means to be subject to collectively binding decisions are identified and examined, referring to those subject to legal duties and legal powers or to those subject to legal duties and state institutions. The contrast between them is most clearly illustrated in relation to non‐residents, those not present in the territory of the state. The extraterritorial dimension of the law thus highlights a fundamental ambiguity in the theory of democracy concerning the extension of political rights.     

法理即法律原理之解说

自清末民初以来,将法理解说为法律原理就成为法学界的通例,但其界定方式则有四种:一是径直以法律原理定位法理;二是将法律原理、法律原则并列来定位法理;三是将法理视为由法律原理推导出的法律一般原则;四是认为法理是指法律原则,但包括法律原理在内。法理和法律原理的存在是一种客观的必然:世上的万事万物都应有其存在和运行的原理,法律自然也不例外;法律作为人类的伟大创造,自身即蕴含着追求正义等法律价值的法理;法律的价值观念虽因时代、地区的不同而会有所差异,但其中的基础法理却不受时空影响;对法律的分析和研究舍法理之外别无他途。立足于已有的研究成果,可将法理界定为"在综合各种法律现象的基础上,由学者所抽象并为社会所认同的有关法律基础、法律根据、法律判准、法律渊源的基础性、普遍性原理"。同时,法理与自然规律、社会价值、内存于法典和单行法律中的法律原则以及事理、情理等存在明显的差异,不可混淆。     

Legal Order,Legal Pluralism,Fundamental Principles. Europe and Its Law in Three Concepts

The essay analyses the way in which the concepts of legal order, legal pluralism and fundamental rights have been used to describe (and decide) what European integration is (and what it ought to be) from the perspective of the law. The essay does not provide a legal theory but limits itself to investigating how certain concepts have been employed to justify legal decisions and to construct legal theories. The juridical discourse on Europe is examined to identify some trends in contemporary legal culture: the decline of a tradition of legal thought, ‘legal dogmatics,’ the vanishing of the distinction between internal and external law (between domestic law and international law, and between positive law and morality), the growing importance of fundamental rights discourse, the centrality of balancing test, the widespread criticism of legal science's claim to neutrality and the consequent normative turn affecting legal scholarship.     

Arguments in Favour of a Functional Theory of Fundamental Rights

The article suggests a relational concept of fundamental rights.This concept enhances the «functional» rôleplayed by some of the rights in the system of a state governedby the rule of law, rather than an ethical universality or asubstantial content coinciding with any list of «human»rights. Fundamental rights belong to the fundamental (ideal, substanticeand normative) criteria of recognition/selection of actions and normain the institutional/normative practice of a legal order. Given thispremise, the work analyses some relevant issues: universal-fundamentalnexus, property rights, liberty rights, social rights. Fundamentalrights refuse any rigid classification which identifies anddistinguishes among them on the basis of their fixed doctrinal structure: universal rights vs. non universal ones, property vs.liberty rights, social rights as rights to state services. Theseclassifications miss the real point about fundamental rights,which are to protect interest and values of individuals sociallydeemed worth of the best legal efforts in the most effective approach.     

The Dual Nature of Law

The argument of this article is that the dual‐nature thesis is not only capable of solving the problem of legal positivism, but also addresses all fundamental questions of law. Examples are the relation between deliberative democracy and democracy qua decision‐making procedure along the lines of the majority principle, the connection between human rights as moral rights and constitutional rights as positive rights, the relation between constitutional review qua ideal representation of the people and parliamentary legislation, the commitment of legal argumentation to both authoritative and non‐authoritative reasons, and the distinction between rules as expressing a real “ought” and principles as expressing its ideal counterpart. All of this underscores the point that the dual nature of law is the single most essential feature of law.     

Insatiable Rights

The essay criticises Ferrajoli's ideas about political democracyand the relationship between it and fundamental rights. Thedefinition of `substantial democracy' furnished by Ferrajoliis considered inopportune, because it claims to provide a semanticsolution to the normative problem of the limits of content ofdemocratic decisions. Ferrajoli is also criticised for equatingconstitutions with the social contract, with the result thatthe functioning of political democracy is tied to unanimousconsent and constitutions are treated as eternal. Finally, theauthor argues that treating the lack of guarantees of fundamentalrights in a legal order as a technical gap is tantamount toconceiving rights and their guarantees as something preordainedto positive law and subtracting them from the democraticlegislator's political decisions.     

论中国和平发展与国际法的交互影响和作用

和谐世界是中国和平发展重要的外部社会基础,而国际法是构建和谐世界不可或缺的法律基础和保障。在国家间相互依存和经济全球化的“地球村”里,一方面,国际法为中国和平发展创造和平与安全的外部环境、建构公正和公平的国际竞争秩序和提供国际合作的法律保证；另一方面,中国和平发展的对内和对外发展战略势必要受到国际法越来越多的约束。与此同时,中国和平发展必然对国际法的和平与发展主题以及人权、法治和民主等普遍核心价值做出重要的贡献。     

Legal Validity, Acceptance of Law, Legitimacy. Some Critical Comments and Constructive Proposals

In this paper the author first presents a critical account of some basic views of Habermas' Discourse Philosophy. He points out some difficulties inherent in notions such as valid justification in argumentation theory, in the notion of ideal form of discourses, and in consensus theory of truth. Secondly, he focuses on Habermas' conceptions of validity, acceptance and legitimacy of law from the perspective of neo-institutionalism. In particular, (i) the author argues that Habermas' definition of legal validity is unclear and unrealistic; (ii) the author stresses the distinction between acceptance and acceptability; (iii) Habermas presupposes harmony between sovereignty and human rights postulates, but the present author takes into account the possibility of conflicts between autonomous popular decisions and human rights which must be resolved by methods of discursive democracy; (iv) criteria for acceptance of law cannot be fixed by a stipulative definition, but are in social discussion; (v) legitimacy is not an objective feature of valid law and presupposes an evaluation based on our political convictions.     

我国预算法修订的规范分析

追求和实现预算民主是我国预算法修订的目标之一。预算法律关系是公共预算关系的抽象和拟制,是立法者运用立法技术制定法律规范的基础和指引,在预算立法与实践之间起着承启的作用。修订预算法应加强预算法律主体的开放性和制衡性,规范和完善不同的预算法律行为及其法权配置,并使预算法律责任具有科学性和可操作性。对预算法律文本中蕴含的各类法律关系进行规范分析,旨在通过对预算法律所预设的逻辑秩序进行阐释和解析,进而说明和论证预算法律规范设定的主体、行为和责任等逻辑秩序与预算实践秩序间的关系。     

财政法基本原则论纲

财政法基本原则,是指财政法中体现法的根本精神、对财政行为具有一般指导意义和普遍约束力的基础性法律规范,包括财政民主主义、财政法定主义、财政健全主义和财政平等主义等四项。财政民主主义着眼于财政的民主参与,财政法定主义着眼于财政的形式规范,财政健全主义着眼于财政的安全稳健,财政平等主义着眼于财政的公平合理。以财政法治的视角衡量,财政法定是财政法治的形式要素,财政健全是财政法治的功能目标,财政平等是财政法治的价值追求,而财政民主则是上述三者有机结合的制度保障。可以说,它们紧密统一于财政法治的理论和实践。     

Necessary and Universal Truths about Law?

Prominent analytical jurisprudents assert that a theory of law consists of necessary, universal truths about the nature of law. This often‐repeated claim, which has not been systematically established, is critically examined in this essay. I begin with the distinction between natural kinds and social artifacts, drawing on the philosophy of society to show that necessity claims about law require a fundamental reworking of basic understandings of ontology and epistemology, which legal philosophers have not undertaken. I show law is a poor fit for a priori and a posteriori knowledge. I distinguish between universal application and universal truth, showing the former is sound while the latter is not. I expose the implications that follow from the initial selection of the central case of law, demonstrating that this choice must be justified, and I reveal two ways analytical jurisprudents shield their theories of law from refutation. This analysis raises significant doubts about the claim by analytical jurisprudents that they are identifying necessary, universal truths about the nature of law.     

中国民法典的品性

现代民法不仅是调整市场经济的基本法,更主要是通过对市场经济的调整来促进社会的进步、推动人的发展的法律,是一部维护人权、解放人性的法律,是建设民主政治与法治国家的法制基础。将民法定位于一部促进社会进步和人的发展的法律,是现代民法应有品性的回归。     

法治视野下的网络反腐

网络反腐法治化建设的宪政意义在于它是电子民主时代公民参政权的重要展现。参政权作为宪法及法律规定的现代社会公民享有的基本权利,在于确认和保障公民参与国家管理及社会事务的管理,监督和抑制权力滥用及其腐败。电子民主时代,网络参政拓宽了公民民主参与的渠道,公民参政权的实现变得切实可行。网络反腐法治化有利于公民参政权的落实,进而有力地推进民主监督制度的发展。网络反腐法治化的基本理念包括公众参与、规范统一、网民保护、信息公开,而建立健全网络反腐的法律制度,保护并激励网络举报人是其法治化的路径选择。     

法定的债权移转之下的保险代位权制度的困境与选择

在以防止被保险人不当得利这一统一的价值引领之下,大陆与英美两大法系发展出法定的债权移转与权利法定代位两种不同的制度安排。由于不真正连带债务理论的局限,法定的债权移转无法有效地防止被保险人的不当得利,而权利法定代位则有助于克服前者所面临的困境,并以此成为一个相对优化的制度选择。我国目前的研究已经对法定的债权移转的困境展开初步的检讨,但是,其尚未对不真正连带债务这一基本理论构造进行深刻的批判。因此,当下的研究有必要上升到防止被保险人不当得利这一价值高度,由此证明不真正连带债务理论所构造的保险代位权制度存在着价值落空的困境,从而为我国当下保险代位权制度的重塑奠定基础。     

Beyond Consensus: Law, Disagreement and Democracy

Nowadays democratic liberal societies face a rising challenge in terms of fragmentation and erosion of shared values and ethical pluralism. Democracy is not anymore grounded in the possibility of a common understanding and interpretation of the same values. Neverthless, legal and political philosophy continue to focus on how to reach consensus, especially through monist, objectualist, contractualist, discursive and deliberative approaches, rather than openly affording the issue of disagreement. Far from being just a disruptive force, disagreement and conflict are matters of fact that no reflection on democracy can underevaluate. They are the major issues through which to look at the intersection of law, politics and morals. The inclusion of dissent is a powerful tool for moral recognition of different understandings of justice. That is where legal procedures become crucial. Law is a fundamental element in the building of a democracy. But it is also particularly exposed to disagreement. Language indeterminacy, dogmatic concepts and value pluralism constitute the main elements that lead to alternative and conflicting interpretations of law in a democratic framework. Major legal progress in the past has come from different understandings of the same legal materials. In this article I argue that respect for disagreement should be a moral principle in democracy and that the role of legal disagreement is essential to understand the evolution and the future directions of democracy as the government of a political community. To do so, a link between respect for disagreement and legal interpretation and argumentation must be established in order to make room for reason and avoid extreme skepticism on the contribution of law to the enforcement of democracy.     

政治文明的现代诉求

文章立足于政治文明发展的基本历程,并从法治的视角解读现代政治文明,认为现代政治文明是以法治为底蕴,其核心和实质是民主政治,同时蕴涵自由、人权、民主、公平、正义等人类普适性价值,现代政治文明所追求的目标应该是宪政国家体制。     

行政法上的客观法与主观法

针对如何理解行政法上客观法与主观法的关系,存在三种基本立场。主客观法分离立场认为维护公益的行政法与公民个人权利形成对峙。该立场存在无法关联违法性与侵权性、抱持无视宪法的行政法观等疑问。主客观法结合立场主张从客观法中分出一部分请求权对应行政主体法定义务。该立场存在宪法与行政法平台错位、公益与私益纵向割裂等局限。主客观法统一立场将客观法当作主观法的全部集合,权利由客观法分解得来。该立场是理解行政法主客观法关系的妥当见解。在分配行政与利害调整观念下,特定或不特定复数私人主体间基于行政法律规范的各种利益与不利益冲突、对立并交织而成的利害关系网才是行政实体法律关系的本质,行政法上的实体权利应当由此导出。遵循“利害关系→合法权益”而非“合法权益→利害关系”的逻辑顺序才是判断行政诉讼原告资格的正确方法。     

权利外观保护理论及其在我国民法典中的设计

权利外观保护理论产生于近代民法向现代民法转向过程中。现代民法应将其作为一项重要原则来对待,其构成中的共性因素包括事实上之外观、善意、实施交易法律行为,而"本人与因"只宜作为具体规则设计时可酌情考量的个性因素。我国未来民法典应在总则部分规定权利外观保护的一般条款,建议表述为:"第三人合理信赖权利外观而与非真实权利人为法律行为时,其依据该法律行为所取得的权利应当受到保护,但法律另有规定的除外。"该条款适用中应遵循穷尽原则,并关注其配套机制的构建和运用。     

Human Rights and Popular Sovereignty: The Liberal and Republican Versions*

Abstract
Popular sovereignty and human rights are the modern pillars of legal legitimacy and political power. Liberal and republican thought, however, tend to interpret the two notions from different perspectives: either as moral principles, emphasizing the self-legislation and autonomy of individuals, or as ethical values, stressing the self-realization of the political community. Adhering to his theory of communicative action, the author brings the two principles together in a non-competitive relation. Here the connection between popular sovereignty and human rights is given by the procedures of a discursive process of opinion- and will-formation. Theoretically, the institutionalization of this process through law leads to a normative model of contemporary democracy, which is based on the substance of human rights as a formal condition for deliberative politics.**     

中国特色社会主义法学理论体系研究

中国特色社会主义法学理论体系研究,是以中国改革开放以来中国特色社会主义民主、法治和宪政建设的实践,中国特色马克思主义法学的现实发展,中国传统文化与文化传统以及人类政治法律文明共识,为研究基础和资源,从中总结、归纳、概括和建构作为一种理论模型的反映中国特色社会主义法治的中国经验而又在约束条件下具有普遍真理性质的中国特色社会主义法学理论。这种研究不仅要致力于总结和概括宏观意义或者一般意义的中国特色社会主义法学理论框架,而且还要特别地总结和概括微观意义或者部门法学意义的中国特色社会主义法学理论构成。