国际刑事法院的司法能动主义:实践、反思及限制

国际刑事法院对《罗马规约》近年来的解释中呈现出司法能动主义的趋势,即背离约文的字面含义和立法者的原意,扩张国际刑事法院管辖下犯罪的定义和可受理案件的范围。国际刑法的混合性质、先前国际刑事法庭的司法能动主义政策以及《罗马规约》适用法条款和解释规则的不确定性都是导致国际刑事法院司法能动主义的原因。作为非经授权的司法立法行为,国际刑事法院的司法能动主义不但违背国家主权原则和罪刑法定主义,而且损害了国际社会通过其追究国际犯罪的信心。构建对其司法能动主义进行规制的关键在于厘清和协调《维也纳条约法公约》中的解释规则、罪刑法定原则下的严格解释以及存疑有利于被告解释方法三者在《罗马规约》解释中的适用范围及适用关系。     

The Spanish Constitutional Tribunal's Decision in Guatemalan Generals: Unconditional Universality is Back

On 26 September 2005, the Spanish Constitutional Tribunal reversedthe decisions of the Audiencia Nacional and the High Court (TribunalSupremo) in the case of the Guatemalan Generals. According tothe two judicial bodies, the exercise of universal jurisdictionover international crimes required a link between the crimeor the victims or the offender and Spain, such as the presenceof the offender on Spanish territory or the Spanish nationalityof the victims. The Constitutional Tribunal held, instead, thatthese requirements are contrary to the principle pro actione,i.e. they result in an unjustified restriction of the constitutionalright to effective judicial protection. The Tribunal also clarifiedthat universal jurisdiction, whose aim is fighting impunity,does not require any link other than the universal characterof the values protected by the provisions criminalizing themost serious violations of international law. The presence ofthe accused in Spain is merely a condition for trial, not adistinct ground of jurisdiction; in other words, the accusedmust be in Spain for the trial to begin, but jurisdiction maybe exercised even in his absence, for example for the issuanceof a request for extradition. The only condition to which theexercise of universal jurisdiction is subject is that the stateof the locus commissi delicti is not already investigating andprosecuting the case effectively.     

刑事二审全面审查原则新探

全面审查是刑事诉讼法界定二审审判对象的根本原则,其建立在司法能动主义、真实发现主义的基础上,有其历史的合理性。随着我国社会的整体转型,司法能动主义受到削弱、真实发现主义受到质疑,加之全面审查要求与实践的脱节,与司法其它价值及与司法整体改革方向的冲突,对其改革不可避免。但由于独特的社会境遇及制度背景演进的渐进性,改良而非废除是更合理的选择。     

中国式司法能动主义的实用主义分析及评价——以陕西陇县“能动主义八四司法模式”为样本

以陕西陇县"能动主义八四司法模式"为代表的中国式司法能动主义在问题意识、主体、性质以及最高法院的功能定位上都与典型的英美式司法能动主义不同,其是一系列的理念、体制、机制和司法技术裹挟下的一种法律实用主义的反映,并且面临着高昂的运作成本,也很容易流变为政治话语乃至意识形态。     

Damaska and the Faces of International Criminal Justice

Mirjan Damaka 's scholarly publications provide important insightsfor the analysis of systems of criminal justice at the internationallevel. This is particularly true for his major book: The Facesof Justice and State Authority – A Comparative Approachto the Legal Process. The book develops ideal types, or models,of the structure and the function of government. As far as thestructure of government, the ideal types of hierarchical andcoordinate officialdom are contrasted with one another. Withregard to the function of government in society, two other mutuallyexclusive ideal types are developed: the ideal type of the purelyreactive state and that of the purely activist state. In thepurely reactive state all state activities are essentially aform of dispute resolution between individual citizens. Consequently,all proceedings take the shape of a contest between two parties.In the reactive state, on the other hand, all law is an expressionof state policies. This entails that all proceedings are essentiallyan official inquiry enabling the state to implement its policies.The four ideal types call for several observations, one of thembeing that, at the international level, there is no authoritythat can be compared to a state. Setting up international criminal courts requires choices withregard to the structure and function of authority. Internationalhuman rights instruments provide no guidance as to the natureof the choices to be made. In particular, they do not indicatewhether the legal process should be structured as a contestbetween two parties or as an official inquiry. The same is truefor empirical evidence. An analysis of the structures of authority in internationalcriminal courts reveal that they represent hybrids of the hierarchicaland the coordinate ideal types of officialdom. The fact thatthese courts are unitary courts has a profound effect on evidentiaryarrangements. The most important issue raised by the exposition of ideal typesof The Faces of Justice concerns the relationship between thegoals of international criminal justice and the appropriatelegal process to serve their realization. Goals of a conflict-solvingnature are best served by a legal process structured as a contestbetween two parties and goals related to the implementationof policies by a legal process structured as an official inquiry.It is therefore essential to determine what goals are beingpursed by international criminal courts. One may distinguishhere between goals that international systems of justice mayor may not have in common with national systems of criminaljustice. The pursuit of the traditional goals of criminal justicecommon to international and national systems of justice doesnot provide compelling reasons to prefer either a contest modelor an inquest model of the legal process. This is different,however, for the idiosyncratic goals of international criminaljustice that set apart international systems of criminal justicefrom national systems. The pursuit of these goals makes it desirablethat historical facts are established as accurately as is possiblein the given circumstances. They are, therefore, best servedby a legal process that takes the shape of an official inquiry.In the hybrid type of procedure adopted by the ICTY there isinsufficient clarity about the procedural status of the peculiargoals of international criminal justice as well as about theuse of procedural means to pursue them. This entails that itis not really possible to determine whether this hybrid representsa success. Hybrid types of procedure cannot truly exist withoutadopting a view with regard to the impartiality of judges thatis inspired by standards enshrined in international human rightsinstrument rather than those that are characteristic for thelegal process shaped as a contest between two parties.     

能动司法背景下的法律方法诉求

近年来,能动司法成为法学界的一个研究热点,本文通过探讨我国能动司法与美国司法能动主义的区别,阐述我国的能动司法不是简单的裁判理念,而是一种政治型能动政策。理想的司法能动是功能上的能动与方法上克制的统一,当前我国的能动司法属于政策推动性质,缺乏对能动的应有规范,而法律方法恰好能从有效性和正当性方面对司法活动予以必要的规制,因此也就成为当前我国能动司法的必然诉求。     

The Demarcation of Straddling Villages in Accordance with the International Court of Justice Jurisprudence: The Cameroon-Nigeria Experience

Bi a ba ran eniyan ni ise eru ologbon afi ti omo je (Where instructionsare insensitive and befitting of a slave, a reasonable fellowamends it sensitively and delivers it in a manner befittingthe free).¹

The existence of straddling settlements between Cameroon andNigeria is one of the features of their geographical locationas neighbouring West African States. Although the existenceof these settlements did not constitute a central part of theboundary dispute between both States, implementation of therecent World Court judgment presents crucial dilemmas as tothe treatment of straddling communities in particular and, tosome extent, boundary villages as well. This article exploresthe alternatives that may be adopted in attaining a fair andjust implementation of the Court's judgment in relation to straddlingvillages and boundary communities. The delimitation and demarcationof straddling villages and villages that fall into another State'sterritory are bound to be an increasingly common feature ofthe work of international courts and demarcation commissionsas populations increase and the need to definitively specifyborders increases. It is, therefore, necessary that a specializedjurisprudence is developed for this area of law. This article,therefore, attempts to highlight difficulties in the jurisprudenceof the International Court of Justice in its work in this areaand suggests a typology of factors that may be adopted in varyingdelimitation lines by adjudicators and demarcators. It alsoattempts a digest of what may represent good practice in thelaw of boundary delimitation and demarcation by examining similarcases around the world. The argument presented is that thereis enough within the corpus of international law and internationalrelations for courts to avoid splitting communities needlesslyor subjecting populations to the whims and caprice of hostileStates' territorial jurisdiction, particularly in relation toa continent such as Africa, which has suffered a long and unfairhistory of balkanization of its peoples and civilizations. Thearticle makes the case that the World Court needs more law elaborationif not judicial activism in its delimitation work to avoid inadvertentcomplicity in the abuse of peoples' rights and to attain a morerobust resolution of boundary disputes. The view advanced isthat where aspects of the Court's delimitation may be unsatisfactoryand contrary to the mutual interests of disputants, those chargedwith the task of implementing the Court's judgment must notbe slavish in their appreciation of the spirit of judicial resolution.Where there is the danger that human and generational rightswould be needlessly compromised, nothing apart from an unimaginativeand unco-operative approach prevents demarcators from independentlyadopting a more holistic resolution of the dispute in the interestof human justice, such as by (within very strict limits) varyingdelimitation lines suggested by the Court in particular sectors.     

国际商事仲裁权的性态

“三大主体、两大关系”是对国际商事仲裁结构的形象概括,纠纷双方当事人和仲裁庭这三大主体之间构成两大关系,即双方当事人的分裂对抗关系、仲裁庭和双方当事人之间的裁决服从关系。从这两大关系中可引申出国际商事仲裁权的两类性态,即程序选择权和社会司法权。权利性与权力性、契约性和司法性构成国际商事仲裁权性质的两对基本范畴,在历史进程和仲裁进程中展现出国际商事仲裁权性态的交互辩证运动。     

世贸组织上诉机构与欧洲法院司法能动之比较——为什么慎谈世贸组织“司法宪法化”

关于世界贸易组织以及欧洲联盟"宪政"的关注度日见高涨,其中,不乏将"司法造法"视为世贸组织制度"宪法化"引擎"的"司法宪法化"学说。但在政府间国际组织内谈论"宪政",不得不保持审慎的态度。比较世界贸易组织上诉机构澄清规则、填补规则、引入规则的司法能动,与欧洲法院的实践有本质的不同,其能动性的发挥有显著的特殊性,不得不区别对待、具体分析。     

徘徊在限权与放权之间——社会转型时期对司法理念的探索

为应对转型时期社会对司法的需求,最高人民法院提出了"能动司法"理念,各级人民法院积极践行,取得了成效,并引发了广泛关注和讨论。能动司法实践中,司法权无序扩张影响了司法的公信力,但能动司法依然是社会转型时期中国的现实选择。我们应当客观评价能动司法理念,承认能动司法的限度,防止能动带来的负面影响。探寻新的司法理念,以继续推进司法体制改革适应社会发展。     

论司法能动的道德风险——道德权利语境下的比较性诠释

在维护道德权利上,司法克制主义与司法能动主义立场各有其理,但分歧并非不可调和,司法哲学上的主流与非主流之分以及两者互补关系的定位不容忽视。从司法主体、司法正义、守法道德义务和道德约束机制四个角度比较分析,两种立场所产生的道德风险也自不同,道德风险也有共性风险与个性风险之分。     

“司法能动”在中国的展开

原教旨意义上的“司法能动”的核心指的是司法裁判过程中的“立法性”司法。中国法学界对于什么是司法能动在理解上是极不一致的,大多数人根据自己的理解进行了阐发,其中不乏添附、歪曲之界说,甚至以讹传讹之谬误。能动司法在中国的展开,既存在理论根基不足之缺陷,又面临着司法职业化和司法能动化相冲突的尖锐矛盾。但转型社会的现实,又要求中国必须同时完成司法职业化和“中国式”的司法能动化的双重任务。虽然存在诸多不足,司法能动的倡导者提出的问题依然是值得人们认真对待的。     

The Shifting and Multiple Border and International Law

The question of how the ‘border’ is conceived ininternational law, and how it shapes identity and peoples’lives, remains largely unexplored in the international legalliterature. This article seeks to contribute to our understandingof the meaning of the border in international law, and in thecontemporary context, by drawing on the work of the philosopherand political theorist, Étienne Balibar, and by reflecting,in the light of his work, on the recent decision of the Houseof Lords in R v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport. It isshown that international law's focus on the territorial bordermay render invisible other borders which are significant forsubaltern groups, and thereby fail to address the manner inwhich borders affect lives and determine outcomes. Borders arenot stable and ‘univocal’, but instead, ‘multiple’,shifting in meaning and function from group to group. They arealso being ‘exported’ such that a person may experiencea foreign border while still within the territory of their owncountry. In highlighting the multiplicity of borders, the articleseeks to prompt further reflection on the articulation and applicationof norms of international law in a way that addresses the realitiesof the contemporary context.     

On the Sources of International Criminal Law

In their efforts to establish a quite original system of proceduraland material rules of international criminal law, by means ofthe so-called "judge-made law", the two ad hoc Tribunals forthe Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda hold a peculiar approach tothe sources of that law. The most controversial of all is theirconcept of "customary law". This paper is an attempt to clarifythe meaning and scope of these sources mainly from some aspectsof the respective rules adopted in the 1998 Rome Statute. Itis also a continuance in this author's research on the sourcesof public international law.     

Multilevel Judicial Governance of International Trade Requires a Common Conception of Rule of Law and Justice

Since the establishment of the Permanent Court of InternationalJustice in 1922, governments have consented to, and activelyused, an ever larger number of international and transnationalcourts, quasi-judicial dispute settlement bodies and ad hocarbitral tribunals for the settlement of disputes over the interpretationand application of rules of international law. Such judicialclarification of disputed interpretations of incomplete, intergovernmentalagreements reduces not only the negotiation costs of governmentsby delegating the clarification of contested facts and legalclaims to independent third-party adjudication. Judicial decision-makingat intergovernmental, transnational, national and private levelsalso supplements rule-making and offers citizens judicial remediesfor defending their rights and interests. Modern internationaleconomic law increasingly complements intergovernmental, legislative,and administrative governance by multilevel ‘judicialgovernance’ so as to protect rule of law more effectivelyfor the benefit of citizens (Section I). This contribution criticizesthe one-sidedly power-oriented perceptions of WTO law as ‘internationallaw among states’ (Section II) and the related perceptionsof international judges as dependent agents of states (Section III).Civil society, parliaments and democratic governments shouldencourage national and international judges to cooperate intheir legal task of interpreting citizen-oriented internationaleconomic law ‘in conformity with principles of justiceand international law’, as explicitly prescribed in theVienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). The legal coherenceof multilevel judicial governance depends on protecting principlesof procedural as well as substantive justice and a common conceptionof ‘rule of law’ not only in intergovernmental relationsamong states, but also vis-à-vis their citizens engagedin, and benefiting from, international trade (Sections IV–VIII).     

The Influence of Personal Values on Legal Judgments

The non‐legal factors that influence judicial decisions have been the subject of extensive debate. Theoretical and empirical work has focused on factors including political ideology, activism, attitudes, and demographics. Personal values are related to these factors and are central to decision making. The study described in this article translated theories and techniques from psychological research to examine the role of personal values in judicial decision making. A novel method of assessment of value expression in legal opinions revealed a different pattern of values expressed in the majority and minority opinions of a case that divided the Supreme Court. An empirical study of legal academics extended this analysis and highlighted the significant influence of personal values on legal decisions. The value:decision paradigm provides a new framework to analyse judicial decision making, judicial division, and judicial discretion and has significant implications for judicial diversity.     

国际视野下的宽严相济刑事政策

近期国际刑事政策的发展趋势是实行轻轻重重的两极化刑事政策.我国宽严相济的刑事政策是在"严"占主角、"宽"为配角的重刑结构下,作为对"严打"方针的反思而提出的,当前是一项刑事司法政策.其内涵虽与两极化刑事政策有差异,但对犯罪采取区别对待的灵活精神与两极化刑事政策相符合.在"严"的重刑结构下,要发挥"宽"这个配角的作用,只能以司法努力,尽可能多地拓展"宽"的空间和份额.应以"量刑"(裁判)这个司法中心环节为基点,向"量刑"(裁判)的前、后两个阶段和领域进行扩展.     

摆脱司法困境: 司法内在化解维度探析

在现实司法中,外部的干扰与内在的缺陷使能动司法与善意司法面临一种困境.摆脱困境,需要能动司法与善意司法的嵌入与融合：善意司法表现在司法动机、目的、行为等方面,能动司法表现在司法解释、司法参与、司法矫正等方面.因此,只有以善意适法、公平正义为目标改善司法形象,以能力提升、能动司法为目标提高司法水平,以尊重良俗、德法互济为目标完善司法机制,提升司法公信力,使司法成为法治前行的力量,才能实现法治对司法进步的期待.     

从世贸组织争端解决机制谈国际法效力的强化

国际法一直以来都是以“软法”、“弱法”的形式出现,努力加强国际法的拘束力,以有效解决国际争端,是国际法发展的一个方向。世贸组织争端解决机制作为一个司法性国际争端解决机制,不论是其制度设计,还是其司法实践,都体现了国际法拘束力不断加强的发展趋势。     

能动司法若干问题研究

作为一种司法理念或司法方式,中国的能动司法与西方司法能动主义既有知识上的缘脉关系,也有现象上的同质性,但由于各国政治及司法制度的不同,两者亦有一定区别,总体上应将中国能动司法视为世界法治语境中司法能动主义的一种特殊形态。西方司法能动主义是以司法独立性较强、全社会规则化意识较为明确、法官职业化制度较为成熟为基本条件的,因此,对于国情差异较大的中国来说,能动司法在实践形态上对西方司法能动主义应既有保留,又有创新和发展,同时应从多方面建立相应的保障机制,亦即:宏观上,建立良性的司法与政治的互动机制;中观上,建立有效的最高司法机构指导机制;微观上,建立合理而有序的法院内部审判运行机制。