A Formal Theory of the Rule of Law*

Abstract
The author presents a relatively formal theory of the rule of law which includes three basic components: conceptual, institutional and axiological. He then emphasizes the differences between a formal and a substantive theory of the rule of law and highlights the advantages and limits of the former. Finally, the author indicates the importance of this type of theory, namely the values it implies such as predictability, justified reliance, autonomous choice, minimization of disputes and legitimacy.**     

法理即法律原理之解说

自清末民初以来,将法理解说为法律原理就成为法学界的通例,但其界定方式则有四种:一是径直以法律原理定位法理;二是将法律原理、法律原则并列来定位法理;三是将法理视为由法律原理推导出的法律一般原则;四是认为法理是指法律原则,但包括法律原理在内。法理和法律原理的存在是一种客观的必然:世上的万事万物都应有其存在和运行的原理,法律自然也不例外;法律作为人类的伟大创造,自身即蕴含着追求正义等法律价值的法理;法律的价值观念虽因时代、地区的不同而会有所差异,但其中的基础法理却不受时空影响;对法律的分析和研究舍法理之外别无他途。立足于已有的研究成果,可将法理界定为"在综合各种法律现象的基础上,由学者所抽象并为社会所认同的有关法律基础、法律根据、法律判准、法律渊源的基础性、普遍性原理"。同时,法理与自然规律、社会价值、内存于法典和单行法律中的法律原则以及事理、情理等存在明显的差异,不可混淆。     

论客观关联共同侵权行为理论在中国侵权法上的确立

客观关联共同侵权行为理论的出现,是大陆法系侵权法在实用主义指导下连带责任适用范围通过"共同关系"理论进行扩张的必然产物,对数人侵权行为的法律责任体系产生了重大影响。我国侵权法上的"直接结合共同侵权行为"实质上就是客观关联共同侵权行为。客观关联共同侵权行为构成的因果关系要件应采"实质要素标准"。在因客观关联共同行为承担连带责任的成立范围上,应该受到"门槛"和"深度"的双重限制;在求偿程序上,应该"以按份责任为原则,连带责任为补充",赔偿权利人负有适当斟酌义务,并适用一次性请求限制规则。     

Understanding Acts of Consent: Using Speech Act Theory to Help Resolve Moral Dilemmas and Legal Disputes

Understanding what it means toconsent is of considerable importance sincesignificant moral issues depend on how this actis defined. For instance, determining whetherconsent has occurred is the deciding factor insexual assault cases; its proper occurrence isa necessary condition for federally fundedhuman subject research. Even though mosttheorists recognize the legal and moralimportance of consent, there is still littleagreement concerning how consent should bedefined, or whether different domains involvingconsent demand context-specific definitions.Understanding what it means to consent isfurther complicated by the fact that currentlegal conceptions are not necessarily groundedin argument; they typically depend on appealsto authority and precedent. The purpose ofthis paper is to use speech act theory toprovide a theoretically grounded conception ofconsent; such a conception can aid in the justresolution of legal and moral disputes thathinge on whether an act of consent occurred.     

The Rule of Law in Contemporary Liberal Theory*

Abstract. Existing accounts of the Rule of Law are inadequate and require fleshing out. The main value of the ideal of rule of law for liberal political theory lies in the notion of predictability, which is essential to individual autonomy. The author examines this connection and argues that conservative theories of rule of law claim too much. Liberal theory equates the rule of law with legality, which is only one of the elements necessary for a just social order.     

对言论自由的法律保护与对滥用言论自由的法律惩罚

刑法中设置以语言作为行为方式的犯罪,其目的不是为了限制言论自由,恰恰是为了更好地保护宪法所确立的言论自由.只有在此目的下修改我国刑法中有关以语言作为行为方式的犯罪,并完善刑事诉讼法中的有关程序,才能使言论自由这一神圣的宪法权利得到切实保障,使那些真正滥用言论自由侵害国家、社会、他人的犯罪行为受到惩处.     

论刑法中的威胁行为

分析威胁行为时,要注意分析威胁行为作为一个行为整体与表达威胁的行为、威胁内容以及威胁的后续行为的关系。不能把作为整体的威胁行为与表达威胁的行为相混淆,也不能把表达威胁的行为视同兑现威胁内容的行为。在有后续行为的情况下,威胁行为与后续行为既可能结合成一个复合行为从而构成一罪,也可能各自独立从而构成数罪,要具体分析。在威胁行为之外实施的先行伴随行为与威胁行为可能会形成牵连关系,可按牵连犯的处罚原则来处罚。     

Interpretation of Unilateral Acts in International Law

The article explores the question of interpretation of unilateral acts in international law both from the perspective of ascertaining their binding force (law determination) and from the perspective of ascertaining their content (content determination). It argues that the objective intention of the author to be bound is what distinguishes binding commitments of unilateral origin from non-binding ones. In turn, this involves the interpretation of a unilateral act in accordance with its content and the circumstances surrounding its making. In practice, the use of clear and specific wording in conjunction with a set of contextual indicators are indicia of the intention to create a binding unilateral commitment. Against this backdrop, the article continues by addressing the question of interpretation of unilateral acts from the standpoint of ascertaining their content. It shows that the text of the act is the primary consideration in determining its content—and that its context as well as the circumstances surrounding its making are also interpretative elements that need to be taken into account. Due to the unilateral origin of these acts the interpretative rule applicable to international agreements can only be used as a point of reference when it comes to interpreting the content of these acts. In this light, the article concludes that more practice is needed in order to elucidate the exact role and weight that should be ascribed to non-textual elements in the context of interpreting unilateral acts. At the same time, the article argues in favour of adopting a broader approach to the concept of ‘interpretation’ in international law. Viewing interpretation not merely as content determination but also as law ascertainment allows us to better assess the persuasive value of arguments in favour or against certain interpretative rules when practice is scant—as is the case with unilateral acts.

     

刑法类型化概念与法治国原则之哲理——兼论开放的构成要件之存在根据

一、问题的提出 犯罪是符合刑法中所规定的构成要件的行为。国家从大量的反社会行为中抽出一部分危害性严重的，作为法律上的犯罪类型加以规定成为当罚的行为，这种法律上的类型就是构成要件。因此，一般认为，构成要件就是指刑罚法规所规定的犯罪类型。构成要件作为刑法类型化概念与法治国的基本原则——罪刑法定主义之间，是唇齿相依的关系。罪刑法定主义是构成要件产生的思想基础，构成要件则是贯彻罪刑法定主义的基础性工程和体现。有什么样的罪刑法定主义，就有什么样的构成要件类型。...     

Derrida and the Philosophy of Law and Justice

Readings of Derrida’s work on law and justice have tended to stress the distinction between them. This stress is complicated by Derrida’s own claim that it is not ‘a true distinction’. In this essay I argue that ordinary experiences of the inadequacy of existing laws do indeed imply a claim about what would be more just, but that this claim only makes sense insofar as one can appeal to another more adequate law (whether the projection of a new law or an existing ‘higher’ law). Exploring how Derrida negotiates a subtle path between classical Platonism and classical conventionalism about justice, the attempt is made to take seriously Derrida’s aim to affirm the idea of a ‘mystical’ foundation of the authority of laws by taking ‘the use of the word “mystical” in what I venture to call a rather Wittgensteinian direction’.     

论见义勇为的侵权法调整

我国立法将见义勇为行为放在民事责任的框架下加以规范,总体上形成了以侵权人承担侵权责任为主、受益人承担补偿责任为辅的调整模式,其实质是在见义勇为者、侵权人、受益人三者的微观关系中赋予见义勇为以法律意义。《侵权责任法》第23条创设的侵权人法定侵权责任与受益人的适当补偿制度,均难以实现保障见义勇为者权利之目的。见义勇为行为的价值在于其属社会公共善,应在社会法的层面对其予以规范,应废除《侵权责任法》第23条。见义勇为基金会应调整其现有功能,成为对见义勇为者及时赔偿的平台;见义勇为者亦可选择依过错归责原则向侵权人主张侵权责任。     

身份行为基本理论的再认识

身份行为作为与财产行为相对应的一个概念是法律行为的一种特殊类型,然又与一般法律行为有诸多的不同.在学理上,身份行为可以区分为广义的身份行为和狭义的身份行为,身份行为在主体、意思表示、目的、效力和本质属性等方面表现出自己独有的特质.研究身份行为即可以在理论上补正传统法律行为理论在研究范围和研究内容上的逻辑缺陷,同时在实践中还可以确定亲属之间的身份地位关系,明确其权利义务,进而维护婚姻家庭关系的安定.     

Naturalism in Epistemology and the Philosophy of Law

In this paper, I challenge an influential understanding of naturalization according to which work on traditional problems in the philosophy of law should be replaced with sociological or psychological explanations of how judges decide cases. W.V. Quine famously proposed the ‘naturalization of epistemology’. In a prominent series of papers and a book, Brian Leiter has raised the intriguing idea that Quine’s naturalization of epistemology is a useful model for philosophy of law. I examine Quine’s naturalization of epistemology and Leiter’s suggested parallel and argue that the parallel does not hold up. Even granting Leiter’s substantive assumption that the law is indeterminate, there is no philosophical confusion or overreaching in the legal case that is parallel to the philosophical overreaching of Cartesian foundationalism in epistemology. Moreover, if we take seriously Leiter’s analogy, the upshot is almost the opposite of what Leiter suggests. The closest parallel in the legal case to Quine’s position would be the rejection of the philosophical positions that lead to the indeterminacy thesis.     

Mosaic Theory and Cyberharassment: Using Privacy Principles to Clarify the Law of Digital Harms and Free Speech

The Supreme Court of the United States, in the 2012 case United States v. Jones, laid a jurisprudential foundation for using mosaic theory to identify and address harms caused when innocuous bits of information are aggregated and used to invade the privacy of a targeted individual. Although mosaic theory has been applied almost exclusively in Fourth Amendment privacy cases, information mosaics can be used to facilitate online harassment. However, courts have not articulated frameworks for recognizing informational harms caused by mosaics. Additionally, although state cyberharassment laws exempt constitutionally protected informational uses from prosecution, neither state legislatures nor courts have articulated the extent of such protected activities in the cyberharassment context. Mosaic theory provides a useful theoretical and heuristic lens for understanding the limits of informational uses and harms in the cyberharassment context. Using the lens of mosaic theory, this article explores the ways information mosaics can be used to harass targeted individuals. The article concludes that states should pursue incremental modifications to their cyberharassment laws to address the harms caused by persistent, intentional, targeted uses of information mosaics against targets and that they better articulate frameworks for understanding which information-sharing activities are exempt from prosecution.     

In Search of the Responsible Subject: History, Philosophy and Social Sciences in Criminal Law Theory

This paper examines the way in which English criminal law's conception of responsibility has changed since the eighteenth century, and explores the relationship between changes in legal framework, changes in processes of criminalisation and punishment, and broader social, political and economic changes. It argues that the development of ideas of individual responsibility for crime are responses to problems of co-ordination and legitimation faced by systems of criminal law, and that these problems can be expected to change according to the environment in which the system operates, with important factors including the distribution of political interests and economic power; the prevailing cultural and intellectual environment; the organisation and status of relevant professional groups and the vigour of alternative means of social ordering. Substantively, the paper explores the hypothesis that criminal responsibility has shifted from a conception founded in ideas of character to a capacity-based conception over the relevant period. Methodologically, the aim is to historicise the structure as well as the content of criminal law within a socio-theoretic framework, constructing a dialogue between criminal law theory of a doctrinal and philosophical temper and socio-historical studies of criminal justice.     

性骚扰行为的司法及私法规制论纲

在现行法的框架下,司法应该且能够以私法手段对性骚扰行为加以规制。性骚扰行为无法列举穷尽,应当授权法官根据上述特点自由裁量。性骚扰行为本身是多种行为的集合,因此,不同的性骚扰行为侵犯的是不同的权利。从司法角度而言,由于我国现行法没有规定贞操权,可以通过对一般人格权的解释来论证性骚扰侵犯了一般人格权。同时,也可以从法律规定的现有具体人格权出发,认定性骚扰同时构成对身体权、健康权、人身自由权及人格尊严权等多种权利的侵犯。就解释论而言,雇员遭受性骚扰,雇主应当根据《人身损害赔偿解释》第9条和第11条的规定承担雇主责任。就立法论而言,性骚扰行为的雇主责任应当适用于劳动关系、人事关系以及公务员与国家机关之间的关系。