行政执法与刑事司法衔接的理性审视

行政执法与刑事司法的有效衔接,事关依法行政和公正司法,对共同打击违法犯罪、推进法治建设具有重要价值。行政执法与刑事司法衔接问题是一直困扰我国执法实践的难题之一,如何构建一个合法、规范的两法衔接机制是理论界和实务界共同研究的现实问题。在回顾两法衔接的历程、梳理两法衔接存在问题的基础上,应当着眼于克服基础理论薄弱、立法衔接不足、行政机关与司法机关定位不准、衔接程序粗陋等障碍,进而有必要厘清基本理论、完善立法内容、明确职责定位、规范操作程序等。     

public Health Ethics From Foundations and Frameworks to Justice and Global public Health

Ethics dilemmas have been present throughout the history of public health, and bioethics has devoted considerable attention to issues relevant to public health. Only recently, however, has public health ethics emerged as a recognized subfield of bioethics. Public health ethics requires that public health improvement come through just and respectful means. Bioethics in the future not only will take on more issues of public ethics, but will apply it extensive scholarship in distributive justice to questions of global public health.     

正义:法律与权利

引论 :正义是人之行为的一种属性我们选用“正当行为规则”一术语来指称那些有助益于自生自发秩序之型构的“目的独立”的规则(ｅｎｄ -ｉｎｄｅｐｅｎｄｅｎｔｒｕｌｅｓ) ,并以此与那些“目的依附”的 (ｅｎｄ -ｄｅｐｅｎｄｅｎｔ)组织规则相对照。前者是内部规则 (ｎｏｍｏｓ) ,而内部规则不仅是“私法社会”〔 1〕 的基础 ,而且也是使开放社会得以形成的基础 ;而后者 ,就其作为法律来说 ,乃是确定政府组织问题的公法。然而 ,我们并不认为 ,所有事实上有可能为人们所遵循的正当行为规则都应当被视作是法律 ,而且我们也不认为 ,每一条构…     

追问刑法精神

所谓刑法精神 ,是指贯穿于刑法之中 ,作为刑法之基的关于犯罪与刑罚的基本观念或理念。刑法典为刑法之形 ,刑法精神为刑法之魂。我国刑法在基本立场或基本精神上更加接近于古典派 ,更准确地说 ,是接近于新古典主义 ,带有明显的折衷或调和色彩。刑法精神(此处特指刑法典精神 )应当是一国整个刑事法律体系的基本精神 ,一国刑事法律体系的基本精神必须统一于刑法精神或曰刑法典精神     

寻求“静态司法”与“动态司法”的完美契合——强制执行公证办证规则中引入质证程序的思考

一、强制执行公证文书的基本价值——一个大致的概括按照中国一位法官的说法,“……公证是‘静态司法’,审判是‘动态司法’”①,而强制执行公证正是联结这两种不同形态司法活动②的一辆直通车。公证人出具强制执行公证文书特别是签发执行证书,意味着强制执行程序的启动,更广义     

Book Review: Considering Social Justice: A Review of David Miller's Principles of Social Justice

Miller's volume is a useful, thorough, and innovating overview of the subject of social justice. It inspires three lines of critical response. The first involves the symbiotic role of philosophy and empirical inquiry in the analysis of justice. The second involves the qualities of opportunity that ought to underlie justice. Finally, there are a few lessons regarding the status of justice in the overall evaluation of society that can be learned from the case of the United States, which has an anomalously bad record with respect to distributive justice. The centrality of politics is one of the implications of the analysis.     

Reforming Global Sport: Hybridity and the Challenges of Pursuing Transparency

In light of recent controversies in global sport, this article surveys the challenges of pursuing transparency in this particular domain of governance. Although corruption in sport is attracting more scholarly attention, there remains little sociolegal research that reflects critically on corporate governance in sport and its implications. This article outlines current calls for greater transparency in global sport and considers how capitalistic underpinnings and distinct hybrid arrangements complicate the task of transparency. It concludes by reflecting on how insights from studies of regulatory capitalism can inform alternative approaches to transparency and accountability in global sport.     

Responsibility and Global Justice

The two traditional ways of thinking about justice at the global level either limit the applicability of justice to states—the only distributions that can be just or unjust, strictly speaking, are within the state—or else extend it to all human beings. The view I defend in On Global Justice (Risse 2012 ) rejects both of these approaches. Instead, my view, and thus my attempt at meeting the aforementioned challenge, acknowledges the existence of multiple grounds of justice. My purpose here is to explain what my view has to say about responsibility. First of all, I explain what my view implies about the responsibilities of the state for the realization of justice. Then I explain that in addition to obligations of justice, my view also gives rise to obligations of account‐giving. I end by sketching what all this implies for institutional reform at the global level.     

严格依法办事：经由形式正义的实质法治观

依法办事理念作为法治公信力建设的关键所在,应当受到认真对待,在解释学的阐述下,其将展现出全新的、非简单化的意蕴。在严格依法办事的主体上,应在执法者、司法者之外增加公民与其他社会主体,并坚持一种“交互主体性”的法律实施观。在严格依法办事的过程中,应把握好严格规则主义与法律解释、法律效果与社会效果、形式正义与实质正义的关系,并创新法律实施机制。在严格依法办事的对象上,应处理好“恶法”实施问题及法律体系与体系外规范的关系,并开展依法治法、法典化运动,重点解决有法难依问题。严格依法办事的良性运作需要我们在法治现实主义的引导下,坚持良法之治,走一条“经由形式正义的实质法治”之路。     

试论执法公正

“执法公正”是指行政执法行为的过程和结果遵循和体现了公平与正义的原则,包括实体公正和程序公正。现阶段,我国更应强调程序公正。实现“执法公正”需要从完善立法、提高执法人员“法治”观念与执法水平入手。     

Introduction: Procedural Justice, Law and Policy

Over the last few years, procedural justice has become one of the most debated fields in social science and law. Modern thinking about law, democracy and public policy inevitably leads to a consideration of appropriate procedures. Images of such procedures are culturally bound and also formed by individual cognition. The word "fair" seems to encompass the most desired features of procedures.