国际人权法在中国人权法制建设中的地位和作用

国际人权法在我国人权法制建设中具有十分重要的地位和作用。相关实际部门和学术界对此尚缺乏客观、准确、充分和一致的认识。这既不利于我国对国际人权法规则的进一步接受和适用,也不利于我国人权法制的健全和完善。应从国际人权法的自身情况出发,以国际法基本原则为基础,以“尊重和保障人权”的宪法精神和原则为指导,并以有利于我国人权法制建设和人权状况的改善为目标,对国际人权法在我国人权法制建设中的地位和作用加以重新认识,并在此基础上采取一切适当而必要的步骤和措施,健全和完善人权法制,并促进人权状况的进一步改善。     

Animal Defenders International v United Kingdom: Sensible Dialogue or a Bad Case of Strasbourg Jitters?

In Animal Defenders International v United Kingdom a majority of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights held that the UK's statutory broadcasting ban on political advertisements under the Communications Act 2003 did not breach the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The judgment departs from the Court's established case law and, it is argued, raises several issues of concern both with regard to freedom of expression, and for human rights adjudication more generally. In particular, the Court's use of a doctrine of ‘general measures’ led it to place a great deal of reliance on the quality and quantity of legislative debate that preceded the UK ban, rather than its actual impact upon the applicant.     

比例原则的中国宪法依据新释

比例原则已被全球法治实践反复证明属于人权保障的利剑,必将成为中国合宪性审查的基本标准。为了更好地推进合宪性审查,并消除对比例原则适用范围与功能的误解,有必要探寻比例原则在中国的宪法依据。通过解释我国《宪法》中“权利义务一致性”“基本权利”“人格尊严”“法治国”“征收征用”等条款的尝试,均不能很好或完全地推导出比例原则。比例原则的本质在于调整权力与权利、权利与权利之间的关系,其功能在于合理确定国家权力与公民权利的界限。比例原则内置于权利和权力之中。通过解释我国《宪法》第51条的“权利的限度”条款和第33条第3款的“国家尊重和保障人权”条款,可以得出比例原则在中国具有宪法依据,属于宪法基本原则。     

对版权保护扩张趋势的反思

为推介中国人民大学法学院博士培养成果,搭建论文品评乃至学术评价之平台,《法学家》专辟博文精萃一栏。该栏目由两部分组成:其一是论文要旨,由博文作者对其博士论文进行全面系统而重点突出的介绍,一般宜包括如下要素:论文的体系架构;论文每章节的主要内容;论文的主要特点;论文的主要创新和不足;论文所研究领域的课题展望。其二是论文评议,可以是答辩委员会的论文审查意见,或者评审专家的点评,具体宜包括如下要素:对论文的总体评价;对论文的体系及各章节的评价;对论文创新的评价;指出论文的不足以及进一步完善的方向。敬请关注并提出宝贵建议。     

Educación jurídica,investigación y derechos humanos inteligentes

The recent studies on the genes, the neurons and the information, are influencing the form to know us and to know the reality. The opportunity is had, for this reason, to improve the formation of the professor and the students of the Right, to happen of an education of repetitions to one of new features, discovery, diversion, that is to say, investigation. One is to avoid “to transmit” information, but to explore it, to construct it, only to invent it, working in equipment, professor and students, inside and outside the hall classes. The contents to investigate can be placed in the past, the present or in the future, like the human rights. Thus, it is tried that the well-known or effective human rights, the products of the legal rationalism, are extended to protect the emotional human dignity: the respect, the confidence, the tolerance, the responsibility, the happiness, desire, the pleasure. Human intelligence is multiple, for that reason the human rights must be intelligent, that protect and develop the intellect, the affectivity, the corporal one, the energy, the environment and its cosmovisión.     

Trámite legal para el pago de obligaciones pecuniarias impuestas al estado colombiano en decisiones sobre derechos humanos y derecho internacional humanitario

This article is one of the research results of the project “Impact of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights case law on Latin American High Courts rulings. Study about Brazil, Mexico and Colombia”. The author indicates how the Colombian State was seen compelled to send off a Law in the year 1996, through which, receiving a special procedure, he is included inside his internal code the guarantee of not repetition as mechanism of application of the decisions in matter of human rights and international human law in said country.     

Reviews

Books reviewed:
Loughlin, Sword and Scales: An Examination of the Relationship Between Law and Politics
Schønberg, Legitimate Expectations in Administrative Law
Bingham, The Business of Judging: Selected Essays and Speeches
Scott-Hunt and Lim, Feminist Perspectives on Equity and Trusts
McColgan, Women Under the Law: The False Promise of Human Rights     

The Pinochet Case: International Criminal Justice in the Gothic Style?

Book reviewed in this article:
Woodhouse, Diana (ed), The Pinochet Case: A Legal and Constitutional Analysis     

从事实到规范:物权法民意基础的实证研究——以土地问题为中心

以社会调查数据为判断标准,物权法对土地制度发展的事实,既有呼应,也有背离、漠视、逃避和模糊。呼应主要包括:明确坚持保护私有财产;妥善规定承包经营权的流转、登记的效力、土地使用权到期后的处理等。背离表现为:继续强调集体土地所有权。漠视表现为:未规定建设用地使用权的类型和取得时效;未明确承认宅基地使用权、集体建设用地使用权的流转等。逃避表现为:未能明确统一登记的具体机构及其设置等。模糊表现为:未能清楚界定征收条件、征收中物权的变动时间、登记审查等。     

法的人本主义

近年来中国提出的以人为本理念,是中外历史上人本主义、民本主义的继承和发展,是当代人类文明发展中有关这一命题各种进步理念的高度概括和理论升华。它的具体内涵可归纳为如下十点:人的价值高于一切;人是目的,不是手段;人是发展的中心主体;促进人的全面发展;崇尚和彰显人性;坚持人的独立自主;尊重人的首创精神;权利优位于义务;权利优位于权力;尊重和保障人权。保障人权是现代法律的根本目的,以人为本应成为现代法律的根本价值准则。依据以人为本的科学内涵指导社会主义法治建设,可以将其概括为法的人本主义。     

行政拘留:被法治遗忘的角落

我国现行行政拘留制度在四个方面存在缺陷。行政拘留应当符合四大基本原则:人权保护原则;参与原则;司法审查原则和救济原则。在从价值观上实现由“形式法治主义”到“实质法治主义”转变的前提下,应当从四个方面对我国的行政拘留制度进行重构。     

国际法上的大国问题

大国问题是国际法实践中的一个老问题。近年来,国际关系民主化与国际法治成为日益重要的国际议程,一批新兴大国也正在崛起,这些新发展既为处理大国问题提供了历史机遇,也使得处理这一问题变得更为复杂,具有鲜明的时代特点。大国问题涉及大国拥有与作为国际法基础的主权平等原则相冲突的法律特权,但法律特权并非是导致大国问题的惟一原因;被赋予法律特权的大国应当承担特殊的法律义务,但获得法律特权并非是大国承担特殊义务,包括特殊法律义务的惟一依据。为了有效约束大国的行动,国际社会一方面应当限制大国可以获得的特权、强化大国应当承担的特殊义务尤其法律义务,另一方面应当寻求建立监督大国依法善意行使特权、履行义务的程序法机制。     

Las competencias urbanísticas y la planificación metropolitana en el estado autonómico español y en el federalismo brasileño

This article makes a comparative analysis between the Spanish and Brazilian Urban Law, from the perspective of territorial and urban planning. Taken the basis of the constitutional rules that distribute powers to public authorities of both countries, and also the main laws that regulate the matter, as the case of RD 2/2008 of 20 June, approving the revised Land Law (TR/08, in Spain) and the Statute of the Cities (Law No. 10.257, f June 21, 2001 in Brazil). Besides that, highlight some differences between countries, such as the structure of the States —Spanish Parliamentary Monarchy and Brazilian Federal Republic— that is not an impediment to enable countries to use the legal constructions of the other country to improve its own system, especially in the metropolitan issue.     

Falling into Line? The Hostile Environment and the Legend of the ‘Judges’ Revolt’

In 2012 the Government made a number of controversial changes to the Immigration Rules, which it claimed would ‘comprehensively reform the approach taken towards ECHR Article 8 in immigration cases’. This paper examines the judicial response, arguing that the courts ‘fell into line’, adapting human rights law to the government's aims through unprincipled and opportunistic techniques, whilst inflicting hardship and injustice on working-class British citizens in particular. Four key moves are identified. First, the courts created an ‘incapable’ test which immunised the rules from in principle challenges. Second, Lord Bingham's Article 8 test, in which the reasonableness of any family member relocation was a central consideration, was replaced with a far less family-friendly test. Third, the courts adopted an ultra-lax rationality test at common law, even when the ‘fundamental rights’ of British citizens were engaged. Finally, the courts identified immigration policy as the ‘constitutional responsibility’ of the executive.     

刑事诉讼法再修改的理性思考

刑事诉讼法的修改,应确立以下几种理念:刑事诉讼法的直接目的为发现真实与保障人权;诉讼模式应以职权主义为基础,融合当事人主义的一些做法;扩大司法参与;确立程序本位和国际优位的思想。     

人权的本性与价值位阶

只讲人权的阶级性 ,否认普遍性 ;只考虑“多数人的人权”而忽视“少数人的人权” ;片面强调“主权高于人权”、“集体人权高于个体人权” ;或只讲“生存权是首要人权” ,忽视政治人权居先的价值地位 ,这些观点都有失偏颇。人权是自然性与社会性、阶级性与普遍性的统一 ,抽象地强调“主权高于人权” ,有可能为以“主权压人权”的专制政权提供理论支持。当今中国的首要人权应是政治人权。     

刑罚轻缓、人权保障与《刑法修正案(八)》——以相关国际公约为蓝本的分析

对照《公民权利与政治权利公约》分析,《刑法修正案(八)》在死刑改革方面的进步值得肯定,但与公约要求的、逐步限制死刑适用以最终废除死刑的目标仍有距离;参照《北京规则》、《美洲人权公约》等分析,新修正案对未成年人、老年人犯罪适用刑罚增加了从宽处理的规定,实现了对弱者的人权保障,但该修正案在建立未成年人及成年人前科消灭制度等方面仍有不足;比照《东京规则》等国际公约分析,其以社区矫正入刑化为代表的非监禁刑之完善,体现了我国对国际公约相关要求的积极回应。     

国际强行法保护的人权

人权并不存在等级 ,所有的人权 ,包括公民权利 ,政治权利 ,经济、社会和文化权利 ,对于维护人的尊严都具有同等的重要性。在国际人权法上有一些人权属于“受国际强行法保护的人权”。但是 ,这些人权也不是更重要和更高级的人权 ,它们是维护人的尊严所需要的“最低限度的人权”。     

Reconciliation: I Know It When I see It 1

States emerging from conflict increasingly seek ways in which to address the violence and human rights abuses of the past in order to move forward into a more peaceful future. The initial responses to mass atrocities were based in legal processes focused on the punishment of the person responsible for the harm. The inadequacy of such an approach resulted in the introduction of a variety of new goals in the transitional period, including the abstract notion of reconciliation which is increasingly advanced as the central goal in dealing with the legacy of the past. This article argues that the failure to examine the relationship between a discourse originally based on human rights and legal approaches and the introduction of reconciliation has only added new challenges rather than resolved existing ones and therefore must be re‐examined. The article also argues that no single approach should take prominence in addressing mass atrocities. Rather a range of options should be available to victims, in particular given the relative youth and inexperience of approaches to violent conflict.