功能分化社会的“去分化”?——权力生产性与权力媒介性的理论冲突及其消解

在功能分化的现代社会中,以卢曼为代表的权力媒介观和以福柯为典型的权力生产观形成了针锋相对的价值立场。在系统理论看来,权力作为政治系统“象征性的普遍化沟通媒介”,维系着功能分化的社会结构,所以权力的媒介性具有自我限制的意义。但是,福柯以权力驱逐法律运作、生产知识话语和控制性实践为例,揭示了权力的生产性对社会的全面宰制和“去分化”的倾向。为了消解权力生产性所带来的“去分化”的危险,应当将权力领域限缩于政治系统,以“去主体化”的立场和“沟通”的衔接性理解权力的运作逻辑,并通过作为结构耦合的宪法与基本权利,既实现由权力到法的符码转译,同时又确保社会子系统内部的强制性力量关系具有正当性与合法性。     

Headscarves, Human Rights, and Harmonious Multicultural Society: Implications of the French Ban for Interpretations of Equality

Through the lens of the French law prohibiting Muslim headscarves in schools, this article examines the way in which societal tensions that arise in the context of religious and cultural pluralism are translated into legal discourses relating to human rights and equality. It explores the way in which the law is rooted in France's broader sociopolitical structure and history and contrasts it to the United Kingdom and Turkey. It proposes that the law is based on an anachronistic, formal interpretation of equality that is inappropriate for addressing the inevitable cultural diversity of modern French society, and through its permeation into law and policymaking more widely, it is a primary cause of the heightened social tensions involving the Muslim minority. An assessment of the legitimacy of a law that restricts minority groups' cultural practices in this way in any society should be based on a substantive interpretation of equality and should necessarily involve an active endeavor to understand the meanings of those cultural practices for those groups within their distinct context. Upon this foundation, law and policy can be developed in a way that better reconciles the pluralism of modern society with the common objectives of social harmony, stability, and tolerance.     

马克思的法律社会理论及其当代启示——以《〈黑格尔法哲学批判〉导言》为分析对象

法律社会理论是在法律社会学所提供的经验素材的基础上对整个现代社会的法律机理和法制系统进行总体性分析与批判,对现代法律关系下的人与物的关系、人与人的关系以及社会总体关系进行一种前瞻式的研究。马克思的法律社会理论深入到社会结构及其关系的内部,对人是人的最高本质这一核心命题进行了深刻解析,是一种关于法律的社会批判理论,并从批判中得出了法律之抽象性、矛盾性和世俗性等现代性问题。     

论社会宪政

社会宪政既不同于传统的国家宪政,也不同于所谓的＂新宪政＂论,它是以规范和调控社会公权力为核心的宪政形式。国家公共领域和社会公共领域并存的公共领域二元化结构是社会宪政的社会学基础,社会公权力和人性尊严的密切相关是社会宪政的价值论基础,人性的善恶双重性是社会宪政的人性论基础,国家宪政对社会宪政的兼容性是社会宪政的政治学基础。在价值层面,社会宪政遵循民主、法治、人权的基本理念;在制度层面,社会宪政主要由社会民主制度、社会公权力制约制度和社会公权力保障人权制度构成。在全球＂社团革命＂浪潮冲击下,社会宪政是我国宪政建设的重要组成部分。     

Rights and the Sovereignty of the People in the Crisis of the Nation State

Following Hannah Arendt's work on totalitarianism, the first part of the paper gives an account of the historical advances of the republican nation state that was born during the constitutional revolutions in France and America at the end of the eighteenth century. This state has organised an efficient solidarity among strangers by means of democratic legislation. The European nation state was particular and universal at once. As Arendt could demonstrate on the Dreyfus affair, republicanism of a specific people was based on the Jacobean patriotism of universal human rights. In the second part an explanation is laid out for the destruction of the European nation state during the first fifty years of the nineteenth century. Beginning with Arendt's thesis on the imperialist society that blurred the borders of state, this thesis is revised with reference to the sociological theory of modern society (Luhmann, Habermas). The last part then turns to the rebirth of the nation state after World War Two and the postimperialist development of globalisation at the same time. Again progress in globalising human rights and civil society is threatened by the uncontrolled expansion of capital and power. The lasting problem is to find any regional or global functional equivalent for the democratic rule of law that for so long only worked on the level of the nation state.     

善优先于权利——社群主义权利观评析

社群主义权利观是在批判自由主义个人权利至上观点的基础上建立起来的。它反对自然权利,主张法律权利;主张积极权利优位于消极权利;主张社群权利优位于个人权利;并提倡"善优先于权利"。但它不反对个人自由,也不主张取消个人权利,而是为个人权利划定适当的界,并为个性的形成与存在寻找历史和社会的基础。这种以社群为本的权利观念奠立在反对自然权利基础之上,充分回应了西方社会的现实需要,是现代权利理论的新发展,并对近代西方社会产生了重大影响。     

现代行政程序的成因和功能分析

现代行政程序是现代行政法的重要内容之一 ,依法行政的实质是依法定程序行政。在我国社会转型时期 ,行政程序应是整合社会的一种基本方式 ,维护社会稳定必须建立和完善行政程序。本文从基本人权的发达 ,私法向公法的渗透和行政权内容的变化三个方面分析了现代行政程序的成因 ,以提供我们进一步认识行政程序重要性的背景知识。本文还从完善沟通 ,提高行政行为为社会可接受性程序 ,建立和维系一个可持续性发展的稳定社会和确保行政实体法实施 ,并展示自身独立的法律价值三个方面论证了现代行政程序的功能。作者认为 ,在行政权日益扩张的今天 ,能让社会接受行政权行使的结果 ,并确保社会的稳定方面 ,现代行政程序将发挥其他法律制度所无法替代的功能。     

An Interpretation of Max Weber's Theory of Law: Metaphysics, Economics, and the Iron Cage of Constitutional Law

Among legal scholars, Anthony T. Kronman and David M. Trubek have provided the leading interpretations of Weber's theory of law. Kronman and Trubek agree on two important points: Weber's theory is fundamentally contradictory, and Weber's theory relates primarily to private law subjects such as contracts. This article contests both of these points. Building on a foundation of Weber's neo-Kantian metaphysics and his sociological categories of economic action, this article shows that Weber's theory of law is not fundamentally inconsistent; rather it explores the inconsistencies that are inherent within Western society itself, including its legal systems. Furthermore, Weber's insights can be applied to modern constitutional jurisprudence. Weberian theory reveals that modern constitutional law is riddled with irreconcilable tensions between process and substance—between formal and substantive rationality. In the context of racial discrimination cases involving equal protection and the Fifteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court's acceptance of John Hart Ely's theory of representation-reinforcement demonstrates the Court's resolute pursuit of formal rationality, which insures that the substantive values and needs of minorities will remain unsatisfied.     

社会理论中的惩罚:道德过程与权力技术

惩罚是法律与社会理论中的一个重要论题。在惩罚问题上,涂尔干和福柯对于近代以来残酷惩罚的衰落,以及从酷刑到监禁的历史变迁都做了分析,并且都触及到国家权力与个人权利相互加强、螺旋上升的现代趋势。而在分析思路和认知态度上,二人却表现出明显不同。关于惩罚,涂尔干坚持一种道德观点,视惩罚为道德过程,而福柯则坚持一种政治观点,视惩罚为权力技术。由这两种不同的典型观点,可以洞察人和国家在现代社会所遭遇的道德和政治困境。就此困境而言,在现代进程中,维护和加强人和国家的道德向度显得尤为必要。     

非自然权利论

迄今为止,理论界仍然主要以自然权利理论作为论证人权的源泉与属性的主导理论。但是,自然权利理论仅仅是植根于西方社会的一种本土性理论,与西方的社会结构以及西方的文化传统有着极为紧密的联系。从逻辑上分析,自然权利理论的论证过程存在断裂,自然权利理论的基础和前提都是无法证实的猜测或者假定。在当前世界各国共同推重人权的情况下,有必要将权利的基础和性质从自然权利的流沙之上移到坚实的人类社会土地之上。     

罪刑法定与刑法机能之关系

社会保护机能与人权保障机能的统一是刑法的整体价值目标,而不是刑法某一个构成要素的价值目标。认为相对罪刑法定原则具有人权保障和社会保护双重机能的观点,实际上是混淆了刑法的机能与罪刑法定原则的机能,错把刑法的整体机能当成了其构成要素的机能。罪刑法定原则虽然应当服务于刑法的整体价值目标,但是,它却不应该、也不可能直接承载社会保护的价值内容。我国《刑法》第3条从正反两个方面规定罪刑法定原则,将社会保护的内容附加给罪刑法定原则,在一定程度上消解了这一原则的社会法律意义,不利于现代刑法观念的培植。     

法权的构成及人权的法律保护

法权不是权利主体单方面的行为自由,而是一种关系,这种关系既涉及与权利对应的义务人及义务,也涉及国家保护及救济的责任。法权有其特殊的构成。法权总是按自己的构成来回应社会的要求,社会的要求如要转化为法权,也必须适应法权的结构特点。在人权的法律保护中,法权正是以其特有结构来回应人权要求的。法权一方面需要以基本人权为自己的内容和自己的正当性根据,另一方面,法权的实现又受到经验领域条件的制约。要能确保人权的实现,法权应当是价值与现实,理性与经验的结合。     

公益诉权论

公益诉权是公民、社会团体等依法所享有的基于公共利益受到侵害或者处于这种侵害的危险中而得以请求法院行使审判权以保护公益不受侵害的权利.公益诉权至少在当事人适格、诉的利益和诉权功能三个方面对传统诉权进行了质的突破,公益诉权作为一种公民权,是一种特殊性的人权,是积极性权利,是行动性权利,或者更透彻地说,这种权利的行使毋宁是一种政治行动.公益诉权的主体是多元的,除公民个人外,社会团体亦可以团体诉讼的方式行使,当下中国的检察机关式公共利益的最佳代表者,赋予其公益诉权有着深厚的法理基础,但从长远来看,"还权于民"是必然趋势,检察机关将维护公共利益提起诉讼的范围限定在国有资产的保护、反垄断诉讼等方面是较为适宜的.     

基于农民权益保护的社区发展权理论研究

农民权益伴随着社会变迁而发展。在主体多元化、社会关系与社会利益交叠冲突的现代社会,农民权益不能仅通过个人选择还必须通过不同组织进行集体选择的方法来实现。农民权益保护要以动态发展的视野,在以农民为中心的主体发展权与以土地为主的客体发展权的立体构建维度中,以农村社区发展权为实践的时空载体,提出基于主客体和谐发展的社区发展权理论,从而寻求农民权益更新、更高层次的保护。     

手术同意书的法律性质及效力

目前,医患矛盾呈现愈演愈烈的态势,由于医患关系在现今社会中的重要地位,医患双方的矛盾已严重影响到整个社会的和谐。作为维护医患双方权益的手术同意书,本应是减少摩擦的“润滑剂”,但是实际上并没有发挥它真正的作用,反而引发了医患双方更多的矛盾。我国手术同意书制度存在许多问题,其中之一就是医患双方对其法律性质认识不清。针对手术同意书的法律性质,有合同说、风险承担说、授权委托说及知情同意说等多种学说。本文针对这些学说进行具体分析,并且着重分析了其中的合同说与知情同意说,在此基础上指出了手术同意书的法律效力：一方面表明医疗行为合法,另一方面正确的划分医患双方的责任承担范围。最后在知情同意法律性质的基础上,对现行手术同意书从主体、标准范围、方式和例外情形等角度提出改进建议,希望可以使该制度更趋合理化,促进医患关系的和谐发展。     

人权的来源与基础探究

自然权利理论的不彻底性、法律权利论证的脆弱性要求我们为权利的来源与基础提供一套坚实可证的解释。权利的来源与基础应当从历史、社会的角度去认识,而不能脱离这一环境。从人类社会的历史看,权利是人们斗争的结果;如同市场中的交易,是社会可供资源与人类本能需求的契合。也正如交易一样,由于信息的不对称和地位的差异,一定社会时期内的权利并不总是在供求的最佳结合点上。因而,无论是政治与公民权利还是经济社会文化权利,既取决于社会制度、物质资源的发展,也取决于精神文明领域的进步。     

The Diffusion of Rights: From Law on the Books to Organizational Rights Practices

How does law change society? To gain new leverage on this long‐standing question, this article draws on two lines of research that often ignore each other: political science research on the mobilization of law, and sociological research on the diffusion of organizational practices. Our insights stem from six case studies of diverse organizations' responses to the accommodation provisions in the Americans with Disabilities Act and related state laws. We found that different modes of exposure to the law combined with organizational attributes to produce distinct “rights practices”—styles of standard operating procedures and informal routines that reflect the understanding of legal requirements within an organization. The diversity of the organizational responses challenges simple dichotomies between compliance/noncompliance, change through deterrence/change through norms, and mobilization/nonmobilization, and it underscores the importance of combining political science and sociological perspectives on law and social change.     

试论和谐立法中的利益衡量

和谐社会只能建立在法治基础上,和谐立法是法治社会的立法追求,是实现社会和谐的基础和保障。在现代社会中,随着社会利益结构的变迁,多元利益共生于同一场域共同争夺着稀缺的资源,面对利益冲突,现代立法的利益调控功能日显重要。和谐立法其实质是一个利益识别、利益选择、利益整合的交涉过程,当代我国和谐立法中的利益衡量应当依据一定的标准和原则。     

Asking the Sovereignty Question in Global Legal Pluralism: From “Weak” Jurisprudence to “Strong” Socio‐Legal Theories of Constitutional Power Operations

The article examines recent theories of legal and constitutional pluralism, especially their adoption of sociological perspectives and criticisms of the concept of sovereignty. The author argues that John Griffiths's original dichotomy of “weak” and “strong” pluralism has to be reassessed because “weak” jurisprudential theories contain useful sociological analyses of the internal differentiation and operations of specific legal orders, their overlapping, parallel validity and collisions in global society. Using the sociological methodology of legal pluralism theories and critically elaborating on Teubner's societal constitutionalism, the author subsequently reformulates the question of sovereignty as a sociological problem of complex power operations communicated through the constitutional state's organization and reconfigured within the global legal and political framework.