漂流“飘”出的健康权官司

激情漂流遭遇不测 提起漂流,位于河南省平顶山市鲁山县境内的山水漂流是旅游的热点.这里河水湍急,落差大,惊险刺激,漂流河道时宽时窄,变幻莫测,最宽处达30m,最窄处只有5m,既有急流险滩,又有平湖深潭,堪称夏季漂流的理想河段.许多游客不远千里而来,为的就是体验漂流的刺激和快感.一到夏天,这里就成了人山人海的世界.然而,在这热闹的背后,却有着一些让人意想不到的隐患.     

失主变被告人,项链盗窃案反转闹剧

为了追回借给好友的项链,安徽籍男青年张通(化名)向北京市公安局朝阳分局小关派出所报案,称好友王虎(化名)在北京市朝阳区某宿舍内窃取自己一条价值3万多元的项链,导致王虎于2015年11月2日被警方刑事拘留.在立案调查过程中,失主张通在接受询问时主动交代了诬告陷害他人的事实.张通非但没有追回项链,反而把自己变身为被告,陷入囹圄中.     

“口供”定罪绑架犯被判极刑

"重证据,重调查研究,不轻信口供",这是我国法律一贯遵循的原则.但是,发生在5年之前的一起绑架杀人案,由于吉林省吉林市警方明察秋毫,广泛取证,调查入微,在无法找到被害人尸体的情况下,审判机关依据公安机关的审讯录像,将被告人处以极刑.2002年国庆节前夕,现年29岁的绑架杀人犯姜琳被押赴吉林市郊的黑沙岭刑场执行枪决.随着一声清脆的枪响,一个罪恶的生命宣告终结.至此,杀人犯姜琳成了吉林省建国以来第一例没有找到被害人尸体而被执行枪决的杀人犯.     

58位业主怒讨500万租金——广州上下九"名汇商城"返租商铺业主维权一幕

用高价格以捆绑承诺返租的方式促销商铺,是一种变相融资快速取得资金的方法。小业主在购买时得到开发商的承诺:在三到五年内,业主所购买的商铺由开发商向业主支付租金, 由开发商统一经营管理。因此,高价卖铺实现促销后,开发商是否兑现承诺, 便成了检验开发商是否诚信的一个标准。     

给私生女的50万元白条抚养费

已过天命之年的赵武胜与相差20多岁的女子婚外生下一女儿.他承诺以自家财产作担保,签下了一次性给付非婚生女儿50万元的《抚养协议书》.经过两级法院审理认定,该协议因侵犯赵武胜配偶的合法权益而不具有法律效力. 婚外生女惹纷争 赵武胜家住江苏省海门市,时年53岁,与发妻共同养育的女儿已经成年.凭借熟练的水电工技术,赵武胜走南闯北四处揽活,家境渐渐殷实.不过,家庭财政大权全由赵武胜的妻子把持,赵武胜手头并没有可以支配的资产.     

被礼金“绑架”的乡村

礼尚往来,是中国人悠久的传统习俗,也是中国传统文化的积淀,应该加以宣传和发扬.然而,记者近期走访发现,在农村的个别地区,借各种理由大摆酒席收礼的风气浓厚. 沉重的礼金过度强调了“礼”的价值,却歪曲了“礼”的内涵,本来增进感情、互帮互助的美德,却变了色彩和味道. 无论是辽宁的李明强、江苏的王保山还是山东的孙占发,面对沉重的人情债时都显得有几分不解和无奈.孙占发说:“那又有什么办法呢!在我们农村,名声和面子有时候比性命还重要.”     

监管失职是“毒跑道”屡现的根源

有望终结“毒跑道”的最后一击终于出现了.2016年6月21日,中央电视台财经频道的《经济半小时》栏目播出了“谁制造了‘毒跑道'”专题,记者通过暗访调查曝光了距离北京不到200公里的“毒跑道”黑作坊.这些作坊把废轮胎、废电缆以及说不清来源的工业橡胶废料打碎后生产制造“毒跑道”的原料.     

热烈祝贺陕西省十一届人大一次会议隆重召开坚持科学发展谋求率先突破中共勉县县委书记王隆庆勉县人民政府县长王山稳

"十六大"以来的五年.勉县县委、县政府以科学发展观统领经济社会发展全局,走上了又好又快发展之路,步入崭新的发展阶段.一个昔日名不见经传的农业大县,在"十五"末踏上了又好又快的发展之路,近两年来,全县生产总值年均增长15%以上,增速稳居汉中市各县区之首;近年来,先后2646户无电户告别了煤油灯,265户茅草房住户搬进了新居,34万农民看病不再难……连续4年被评为"全市综合工作先进县".     

物权法与普通民事纠纷

《物权法》的颁布,为维护国家基本经济制度、维护社会主义市场经济秩序、保护权利人的物权提供了民事法律依据,同时也为不久的将来我国民法典的问世打下了坚实基础,其意义重大、深远.但本文的视角是在微观层面,选取几类百姓日常生活中已经出现或者可能出现的民事纠纷,结合《物权法》的相关规定加以分析运用,以飨读者.这些问题,在《民法通则》中未有规定或规定甚少,之所以称"普通民事纠纷"是为了与司法实践中主要发生于单位之间的"经济纠纷"以示区别.……     

跳楼冤案终获赔偿

2007年元旦这天,宣汉县鸡唱乡大坪村一社瘫痪10年的龚维周,委托家人赶了300里路程,将自己亲手绣着"秉公执法,还我公正"的鞋垫,赠送给了宣汉县检察院渎职侵权检察科的干警们,以此感谢检察官严查10年前原鸡唱乡党委书记高泽孝、公安员肖光奎非法控制其人身自由,导致其跳楼致残瘫痪至今的非法拘禁案,使他终于获得了迟到的公正和高额的赔偿金.     

利用ATM故障恶意取款案的法律性质辨析

Malicious withdrawal from ATM constitutes offence of theft and belongs to “theft from financial institutions”. In case of “extremely huge amount”, according to China’s Criminal Law, the minimum statutory penalty for the accused is life imprisonment, which is undoubtedly too severe. So far as judiciaries are concerned, reflection should be made with respect to the relevant legislative provisions. In handling individual cases, the wisest practice for judiciaries is to refer to the provision of clause 2 of article 63 of the Criminal Law, hence submitting them to the examination and approval by the Supreme Court for mitigation of penalties. Fu liqing, Ph.D graduate of Peking University (major in the science of criminal law), is now a lecturer at Law School of Renmin University of China. He once learned at Law School of Tokyo University of Japan (2004.10∼2006.9). His representative works are Make-up of the Rule of Law, Voice of the Rule of Law, Theory of the Subjective Illegal Elements—Evolving with the center of intention crime. Meanwhile, he has about 40 articles published in academic journals. His recent research is in the field of theoretic re-construction of the constitutive crime elements and the application of interpretation method on criminal law, etc.     

我国刑事赔偿制度之改革

In reference to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter referred to “the Covenants”), the state compensation system of China in criminal justice shall be reformed as such: Compensation for a miscarriage of justice should not be determined by the results of first instance or second instance, but no guilty through retrial in the final trial upon finding of new evidences. If policemen, prosecutors and judiciaries take lawful measures, causing loss to the suspected due to arrest, detention or other enforcement in the criminal proceedings, the suspected should not get the state compensation for that even if he is decided no guilty in the final trial. If the suspected is cooped up illegally, he should get the state compensation even if being decided guilty finally. The measures of search and seizure should be included in coercive measures, hence differentiating the lawful search and seizure and the unlawful infringement of the property rights. Yang Yuguan, Professor of the Procedure Law Institute in China University of Political Science and Law, whose research mainly covers procedure law and human rights law. He wrote many books and essays, for instance, “Computer and Crime” (1986), “On Plea Bargaining” (1986), “Basic Education in Prisons in China” (1995), “The United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Policy” (1996), “On the Ratification and Implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” (2000), “On Hearsay” (2001), “On Exclusionary Rule” (2002), “Human Rights Law: Study On International Covenant on Civil and Political Right” (2003), “The International Criminal Court: Idea, reality and Prospective” (2007), “Death Penalty Control with Procedural Law” (2006), “On Due Process of Law and Human Rights Protection” (2005). He was once a researcher fellow of Ministry of Justice of China, a member of the Crime Prevention Branch of the United Nations Office at Vienna, and an editor-in-chief in some books, such as “The United Nations Criminal Justice Norms and Standards”, “The United Nations Human Rights Treaty Bodies and their Comments”, “A Study On UN Convention of Anti-corruption”.     

论破产法上债务人高管人员民事责任的追究

The Enterprise Bankruptcy Law has designed the regime for debtor’s senior managers to bear civil liabilities, while the framework design concerning the prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities is still unclear. How to establish a prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities of debtor’s senior managers in line with the purposes of the bankruptcy regime is a substantial issue during the implementation of Enterprise Bankruptcy Law. The realization of the civil liabilities regime of debtor’s senior managers depends on the establishment and operation of a relatively well-developed prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities. The focus of the prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities is to determine the subject of prosecution of civil liabilities, the way to realize civil liabilities, and the special hearing proceedings and authorities of the court. Taking steps to clarify and improve the prosecution mechanism of civil liabilities focusing on the subjects of prosecution (debtor’s senior managers) and authorities of the court, is the essence and systematic safeguard of realizing the civil liabilities regime of debtor’s senior managers in the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law. Gan Peizhong, Ph.D, is a professor of law and director of the Research Center for Enterprise and Company Law at Peking University. Prof. Gan is a recognized expert on economic law, company law, bankruptcy law and the reform of state-owned enterprises in China. He has released numerous articles on Chinese law journals and published many books. His major publications include Encyclopedia of Chinese Economic Law (vice editor-in-chief), New Studies on Economic Law (co-editor), New Studies on Enterprise Law (author), Studies on Chinese Economic Adjudication (editor-in-chief), Studies on Foreign Economic Law in Beijing (editor-in-chief), General Theories on Economic Law (co-editor), Legitimate Exercise of the Corporate Control Rights (author). Moreover, he was named the “leading young and middle-aged jurist” by Beijing Law Society in 1999. In addition, Prof. Gan is the deputy-president of the Securities Law Association, a member of the Standing Committee of the Economic Law Association under China Law Society. He also serves as the consultant of the Legislative Affairs Commission of the NPC Standing Committee and Beijing Municipal People’s Congress, as well as the Haidian District Court of Beijing.     

中国法学引证研究之省思

The methodological basis of legal cytology is empirical positivism, i.e., the social empirical investigation method is employed to make a quantitative analysis on legal research papers. Cytology has limitation in methodology, behind which a complicated “knowledge-power” structure exists. Considering the matter in China’s present legal citation researches, the real quality of legal papers shall not be evaluated by the citation rate simply, but establishing a localized academic evaluation system to scale it comprehensively. Liu Lei, Ph.D of law, works at Suzhou University. His publications include Executing the deferment of prosecution with discretion (Chinese Journal of Law, 28(4), 2006), Spontaneous order: A puzzled analysis on Hayek’s liberty theory (Law & Social Development, 12(2), 2006), Reflections on the rule of mere-indictment-information in pretrial procedure (Global Law Review, 29(2), 2007), Recognition of local acknowledge from Chinese jurisprudence (Law & Social Development, 13(4), 2007), On the structure of the criminal trial in criminal appeal (Chinese Criminal Science, (4), 2007), An examination of criminal detention power from the perspective of the principle of separation of powers (Global Law Review, 30(3), 2008).     

关于完善中国缺陷产品召回制度的若干问题

Defective product recalling system is a new regime in modern civil law, characterized by its special functions to prevent and eliminate the harms concerning consumers’ body and property due to potential defects of products. In legal nature, it is necessary to define “recalling defective products” as the obligation rather than the liability of manufacturers or sellers, so as to encourage both manufacturers and sellers to take effective remedies immediately upon defective products. Product recalling is of two categories, i.e., active recalling and compulsory recalling, and the breach of such recalling obligation will lead to a series of legal liabilities. Considering the importance of the recalling system and the economic development of China, it is strongly proposed that China shall formulate the Law of Defective Product Recalling. Wang Liming, Ph.D of Law, is currently a vice president of Renmin University of China and dean of the Law School. Prof. WANG is also a member of the Law Committee of 10th and 11th National People’s Congress, vice president of China Law Society. Prof. WANG is a leading expert in the drafting and formulating important civil laws in China, such as the Law of Real Rights of PRC. His main research area is civil and commercial law. Quite a number of his monographs won national academic achievements award, including but not limited to Study on Civil Law Regime (Renmin University of China Press, 2008), Study on General Principles of Civil Law (Renmin University of China Press, 2003), Draft of Law of Real Rights and its Interpretation (China Legality Press, 2001), etc. He also has 100 or so articles published in law journals home and abroad.     

Review on the inefficiency and disorganization of judicial power

The reform of civil procedure has been taken as an important topic by both scholars and judges in the recent twenty years. Cases and judges’ practices offer materials and opportunities for scholars to carry out researches, which help judges find the direction of the reform on civil procedures. However, it is not advisable to reconstruct the absolute adversary system and pure due process in China to reduce the great power of the court. Therefore, it is essential to review on the basic theory of civil procedure and overcome the inefficiency and disorganization of the judicial power by regulating judges’ power and independence as well as their responsibilities. Xiao Jianhua, professor and doctoral tutor of China University of Politics and Law. He got a master degree in Southwest University of Politics and Law in 1995 and a doctor degree in China University of Politics and Law in 1998. He had been a Fulbright Visiting Scholar studying at Law School of Northwestern (USA) in 2003–2004. His research field covers civil procedural law and evidence law. His six books on civil procedural law and evidence law are published in China, his another book on bankruptcy will be published in England. Now his research is focused on comparative law.     

Credit card fraud under Chinese criminal law

Credit card fraud is a new type of fraud amended into the Criminal Law of China in 1997. The “credit card” under credit card fraud is interpreted as a very board concept, which includes debit card and virtually all electronic payment cards used in ordinary payment, credit loan, transfer and settlement of account, cash deposit and withdrawal. Therefore, it is necessary for the legislature to revise “credit card” under this special fraud into “electronic payment card,” and “credit card fraud” into “electronic payment card fraud,” which will be understood easily and precisely. “Use” and “fraudulent use” of credit card under this fraud is defined as ordinary use of credit card, including withdrawal cash with authentic or forged credit card from ATMs. It is unreasonable to define “malicious overdraft” as a form of credit card fraud under the Chinese Criminal Law. In the future amendment, this kind of criminal conduct shall be separated as independent named as “malicious overdraft” or “abuse of credit card” under the Criminal Law with less stiff statutory punishment than that of credit card fraud. Besides, under the Chinese Criminal Law, stealing credit card and using it is held as “theft,” which is neither reasonable nor logical. Therefore, it should be revised in the future criminal law.     

中国行政执法困境的个案解读

Due to lack of effective, and adequate communication on the standpoint of the government and the attitudes of civil society in legislative process, this has led to tension between the government and the general public. Within the context of law enforcement, the government sticks to “problem-based strategies” and “campaign-based enforcement”, who believe in the power of coercive force. As a way out of the dilemma in law enforcement, it is required that in the process of rule-making, the government should communicate effectively with the civil society in the institutionalized system, focusing on learning, reflection, and strategic adjustment. Wang Xixin, Professor at Law School of Peking University. Since 1999, Prof. Wang is a working member of China Administrative Legislative Research Group an academic team advising China’s Legal Affairs Working Commission on administrative law reforms. Since 2001, he is a major drafter for China’s Administrative Procedure Act. Since 2002, he is a research consultant for the NPC Standing Committee General Office. Since 2003, he is a research fellow of the China Law Center of Yale Law School. Since 2005, he is a Vice-chairman of Beijing Administrative Law Society. In academia, Prof. Wang is focused on administrative procedure, public participation, rulemaking and comparative administrative studies, whose publications include books, such as “Administrative Procedure: A Theoretic and Institutional Inquiry” (Beijing, 2007) and “Public Participation and Administrative Process” (Beijing, 2007) and some 30 articles for journals published in China and America. Moreover, Prof. Wang often submits papers and gives lectures in academic forums, including Columbia Law School, Yale Law School, the Woodrow Wilson Center for Int’l Scholarship, and Carnige Endowment for Int’l Peace.     

A case of mistaken identity: George Stigler, “The Problem of Social Cost,” and the Coase theorem

“The Problem of Social Cost” is rightly credited with helping to launch the economic analysis of law. George Stigler plays a central role in the professional reception of Coase’s work and, in particular, of the idea that came to be known as the Coase theorem. While Coase’s negotiation result was taken up in the scholarly literature not long after the publication of “The Problem of Social Cost,” it was Stigler who gave the theorem its name and introduced it to scores of readers in The Theory of Price (1966). His remaking of Coase’s idea into a “theorem” had significant rhetorical force, which, combined with the challenge that it pose to received thinking about externality problems, both lent credibility to the idea and made it a force to be reckoned with. The present paper analyzes Stigler’s various commentaries on the Coase theorem with a view to getting at both how Stigler understood the theorem and its import and why he exhibited such a fascination with it over the last 30 years of his life.     

罪刑法定视域中的刑法适用解释

The judicial interpretation of criminal law should be an application interpretation to individual cases that is guided by judges and participated by the prosecutor and the accused, for which the judicial judgment should be combined with the application of criminal law of specific cases, and the criminal precedents should be as a carrier. The Supreme People’s Court should change from the previous practices of issuing normative and abstract interpretation to the dual approaches of the interpretation of criminal law application through direct creation and indirect acknowledgement. Liang Genlin, Professor and Vice Dean of Law School of Peking University and as a visiting professor of University of Tuebingen (2001–2002). His main research focuses on criminal law and criminal policy, and his important publications include “On the Structure of Punishment”, “Liang Genlin’s Review on Criminal Policy, Volume I, Criminal Policy: Standpoint and Category”, “Liang Genlin’s Review on Criminal Policy, Volume II, the Arm of the Law: Expand and Limit”, “Liang Genlin’s Review on Criminal Policy, Volume III, Criminal Sanction: Manner and Choice”. Besides, he has also published over 40 discourses on criminal law and criminal policy since 1996.