浅论网络犯罪刑事司法管辖权的建构

目前,网络正以燎原之势推动着全球化进程,“天涯若比邻”早已不是人类遥不可及的梦想,“数字化生存”方式正全方位地改变着我们的生活。然而,不可否认的是网络带来了方便和快捷,也带来了矛盾和冲突。历史多次证明,每一项新技术的发展必然会给原有的法律体系带来冲击,网络也概莫能外,并不可避免地带来一系列法律问题,对传统法律规则形成强烈的冲击,其中最早表现出来的就是网络犯罪刑事司     

Support for Harsh Criminal Sanctions and Criminal Justice Beliefs: A Social Dominance Perspective

Much of the criminal justice literature indicates that people’s support for harsh criminal sanctions such as the death penalty is strongly related to their beliefs about deterrence and their beliefs about retribution. In this paper, using social dominance theory as our organizing framework, we expand upon this literature by showing that social dominance orientation (SDO) is also related to support for harsh criminal sanctions, as well as to deterrence and retribution beliefs. In addition, we show that the relationships between SDO, on the one hand, and support for various forms of severe criminal sanctions, on the other, are mediated by deterrence and retribution beliefs.

Technology and Criminal Justice

The extent and use of technology in the British criminal justice system is uneven. Two areas are examined; first where technology is used in prisons or by the police, and secondly when it is used to develop new sanctions, as with electronic monitoring, or as attachments to existing sanctions such as drug testing. Technology in prisons is mainly in the form of perimeter security, and in the police through CCTV cameras or databases. In the second the emphasis is on tracker systems which gives the supervisor greater control. Technological development in criminal justice is not without its critics. Some regard existing technological developments with suspicion, seeing them as a means of enhancing control, or as an attack on traditional liberal values, or more importantly as an extension of a form of behaviourism which is concerned only with the observable act. Others note the expensive failures of technology where systems fail to work or are delivered late. It is suggested a Government study is required to examine existing technologies and its likely future impact whether on the criminal justice system generally or on those working within it or as inmates.     

略论刑事诉讼中的公正与效率——以不起诉制度为范本

现代法治国家,公正与效率无疑是刑事诉讼法追求的两种价值,刑事诉讼的基本制度无不体现着此两种价值的冲突与融合.中德两国的刑事诉讼法均将公正摆在优先于效率的位置,但我国刑事诉讼法却更加突出了实体公正的重要性,忽视了诉讼效率的因素.文章以中德两国的不起诉制度为比较范本,进一步分析刑事诉讼中公正与效率的关系,从而在刑事诉讼的制度构建与实践中实现两者关系的合理定位.     

全球化和刑事司法

刑事司法的全球化正在逐步成为现实。而且全球化的进程旨在在世界范围内采取联合行动预防和惩治某些特定的犯罪。然而,刑事司法全球化的构建需要建立在统一的刑事司法文化基础上,与修正的报应模式和法律与秩序模式不同的是,刑事司法全球化必须有整合一致的人权文化。提高个体、政治、社会和经济人权的整体文化,是保障建立刑事司法全球化的最佳途径,它服务于国际公共价值和秩序,同时还致力于社会公正,确保相关人员,特别是被害人和被告人的权利保障。     

协商性司法——德国刑事程序中的辩诉交易？

一、德国协商性司法简介 近年来,德国刑事司法的实施状况经历了剧烈的变化.指控、量刑与案件处理中的协商已经成为普遍存在的现象,尽管这些协商实践曾被认为与德国刑事程序中的若干诉讼原则与司法传统是相抵牾的.     

联合国刑事司法准则与我国刑事法律改革若干问题

1998年10月5日,我国签署了《公民权利和政治权利公约》。该公约最为明确、集中、具体地规定了联合国刑班司法准则．我们有必要将我国的刑事立法与联合国刑事司法准则相对照．寻找差距．并提出改革、完善的具体措施。从而推动我国刑事法律向前发展。试就涉及刑法、刑事诉讼法方面的问题作了一些探讨。     

Corrective Justice as A Principle of Criminal Law: A Prolegomenon

This article argues that corrective justice is an adequate principle of criminalization. On my interpretation, corrective justice holds that, in order for an action to count as a crime, there needs to be a plausible normative story about an offender having violated the interests of a victim in a way that disturbs their relationship as equal persons and a subsequent story about responding to crime in a way that corrects this disturbance. More specifically, I claim that corrective justice is concerned with the protection of interests that persons have in owning private goods throughout standard interactions with other persons. The argument proceeds in three steps. First, I specify the subject-matter that principles of criminal law need to ground and provide an outline of the idea of corrective justice. Second, I show that corrective justice can account for the main cases of crime and the salient modes of criminal responsibility. I also argue that corrective justice can make sense of two prima facie recalcitrant types of cases (rape and inchoate offenses). Third, and finally, I address two objections to my corrective justice theory of criminal law. The first concerns the implications corrective justice has for locating criminal law along the private/public law divide. The second objection raises the putatively problematic consequences corrective justice has for understanding the separation between criminal and civil law.     

Aquatic Crime: A New Horizon in Criminal Justice Research

This article focuses upon a relatively unexplored area of criminal activity, namely, aquatic or water based criminal activity. The specific concern is the need to focus upon the vast domain of water, engulfing over two-thirds of the earth's surface, in understanding and expaining many forms of intranational and international criminality. Emphasis is placed upon the need for comprehensive research in order to fill a void in criminological theory and to generate a better understanding of the potential of aquatic environments in promoting and concealing criminal activity. Moreover, comprehensive research is essential in order to promote a realistic assessment of the nature and extent of aquatic crime and to improve our ability to effectively combat such activity.     

复和正义和刑事调解

犯罪自产生以来 ,其恶性随着人类文明的进步而加大 ,相反 ,人类用于对付犯罪的刑罚手段却渐趋轻缓和文明。毫无疑问 ,到目前为止 ,刑罚仍是对付犯罪最为有效的手段之一 ,审判也是解决犯罪问题的主要方式。但由于建立在报应基础之上的刑罚 ,本质上是一种“以恶制恶” ,因此 ,其弊端也是显而易见的。由此 ,在处理犯罪问题时需要引入复和正义 ,并进一步扩大刑事调解范围     

Participatory Democracy and Criminal Justice

This essay asks if there is a role for an active public in ratcheting down the harsh politics of crime control in the United States and the United Kingdom that has led to increased use of the criminal law and greater severity in punishment. It considers two opposing answers offered by political and legal theorists and then begins to develop a participatory democratic framework for institutional reform.     

The Criminal Justice Approach: Case Examples

The article presents a special form of a European comparative synopsis. For this case examples have been chosen ranging from administrative or minor (criminal) offences to increasingly serious offences and offenders. In this way it can be comparatively demonstrated how the criminal justice systems studied handle specific cases and whether they do so in a similar or different way.