责任政府构建的当代主题与基本维度

确责与问责是当代责任政府建设的关键环节。确责与问责构成了当代责任政府构建的主题,也规定了责任政府构建的基本维度。责任政府构建需要在正确定位政府职责、建立有效问责机制的基础上,促进政府对人民认真负责。     

责任政府:内涵、形式与构建路径

依现代民主政治的发展,责任政府的外延已由责任内阁制政府扩展至所有民主政府。就责任政府而言,责任应是民主政府系统中的核心要素。我国责任政府体制包括两个组成部分:一是政治问责制,即国家行政机关要对国家权力机关负责,国家行政机关首长要对自己机关的全面工作向国家权力机关负政治责任。二是行政问责制,即行政首长要对整个行政机关的工作负全面责任,行政首长具有对政府组成部门及其首长、下级行政机关及其首长、公务员的行政问责权力。目前我国行政问责在理论、实践上还存在一些问题。从行政问责逐渐发展到政治问责是我国责任政府建构之路径。     

Accountability for Private Military and Security Contractors in the International Legal Regime

Abstract

The rapidly growing presence of private military and security contractors (PMSCs) in armed conflict and post-conflict situations in the last decade brought corresponding incidents of serious misconduct by PMSC personnel. The two most infamous events—one involving the firm formerly known as Blackwater and the other involving Titan and CACI—engendered scrutiny of available mechanisms for criminal and civil accountability of the individuals whose misconduct caused the harm. Along a parallel track, scholars and policymakers began examining the responsibility of states and international organizations for the harm that occurred. Both approaches have primarily focused on post-conduct accountability—of the individuals who caused the harm, of the state in which the harm occurred, or of the state or organization that hired the PMSC whose personnel caused the harm. Less attention, however, has been paid to the idea of pre-conduct accountability for PMSCs and their personnel. A broad understanding of “accountability for” PMSCs and their personnel encompasses not only responsibility for harm caused by conduct, but responsibility for hiring, hosting, and monitoring these entities, as well as responsibility to the victims of the harm. This article provides a comprehensive approach for analyzing the existing international legal regime, and whether and to what extent the legal regime provides “accountability for” PMSCs and their personnel. It does so by proposing a practical construct of three phases based on PMSC operations—Contracting, In-the-Field, and Post-Conduct—with which to assess the various bodies of international law.     

我国实施行政问责制的困境及完善路径

具备高度的责任心和负责精神、完善的责任机制和可问责机制,无疑是一个有效率和有公信力的现代政府所必须的品格及活力的源泉。行政问责制是民主政治的一个组成部分,是实现责任政府的一个重要实现途径。本文在阐述行政问责制理论基石的基础上,分析了我国实施行政问责制的困境,提出了完善行政问责制的对策建议,希望以此能对我国行政问责制度的构建和完善有所帮助。     

Accountability in the Regulatory State

Accountability has long been both a key theme and a key problem in constitutional scholarship. The centrality of the accountability debates in contemporary political and legal discourse is a product of the difficulty of balancing the autonomy given to those exercising public power with appropriate control. The traditional mechanisms of accountability to Parliament and to the courts are problematic because in a complex administrative state, characterized by widespread delegation of discretion to actors located far from the centre of government, the conception of centralized responsibility upon which traditional accountability mechanisms are based is often fictional. The problems of accountability have been made manifest by the transformations wrought on public administration by the new public management (NPM) revolution which have further fragmented the public sector. In this article it is argued that if public lawyers are to be reconciled to these changes then it will be through recognizing the potential for additional or extended mechanisms of accountability in supplementing or displacing traditional accountability functions. The article identifies and develops two such extended accountability models: interdependence and redundancy     

行政问责制的法制构建

行政问责制是政府官员向社会公众和民意机关承担政治责任的一种政治法律制度。我国现行的行政问责制存在问责事由狭窄、对象不清、主体越位与缺位并存,责任不明、落实不力和程序不规范等问题。为此,我们需要明确行政问责制的要素构造与运行机制,加强人大的问责职能,完善政府绩效评估、行政公开、新闻监督等配套制度,同时要壮大第三部门,强化社会监督。     

行政问责制走向刍议

探索行政问责制的走向,对于行政问责制向纵深发展,促进我国的民主政治建设和建设服务型政府有着重要的意义。要使行政问责制进一步规范化,必须由权力问责走向制度问责,由以同体问责为主走向同体和异体共同问责,由事后问责、问题问责、火线问责走向全过程问责、常态问责和终身问责,由外部问责走向内外部结合问责,由以政治问责为主走向政治与道义问责并重。     

我国行政问责制的实践反思

行政问责制是建设责任政府、法治政府、民主政府和效能政府的重要保障。自2003年＂非典＂之后,我国政坛掀起了一场迅猛的＂问责风暴＂,取得了一大批问责成果,然而,在实践过程中却凸显出一系列亟待解决的问题。因此,必须完善行政问责制度,以确保政府部门及官员真正做到有权必有责、用权受监督、违法受追究,由此建立起廉洁、高效的责任政府和服务型政府。     

Accountability and psychiatric disorders: How do forensic psychiatric professionals think?

Swedish penal law does not exculpate on the grounds of diminished accountability; persons judged to suffer from severe mental disorder are sentenced to forensic psychiatric care instead of prison. Re-introduction of accountability as a condition for legal responsibility has been advocated, not least by forensic psychiatric professionals. To investigate how professionals in forensic psychiatry would assess degree of accountability based on psychiatric diagnoses and case vignettes, 30 psychiatrists, 30 psychologists, 45 nurses, and 45 ward attendants from five forensic psychiatric clinics were interviewed. They were asked (i) to judge to which degree (on a dimensional scale from 1 to 5) each of 12 psychiatric diagnoses might affect accountability, (ii) to assess accountability from five case vignettes, and (iii) to list further factors they regarded as relevant for their assessment of accountability. All informants accepted to provide a dimensional assessment of accountability on this basis and consistently found most types of mental disorders to reduce accountability, especially psychotic disorders and dementia. Other factors thought to be relevant were substance abuse, social network, personality traits, social stress, and level of education.     

论我国行政问责制的基本构成——兼评《关于实行党政领导干部问责的暂行规定》

《关于实行党政领导干部问责的暂行规定》的颁布实施，对于统一我国行政问责立法，加强领导干部行为规范具有重要意义。但我国行政问责制在构建进程中还存在泛化、滥化与简单化现象，还没有完成由“权力问责”向“制度问责”过渡。作为一种独立的责任追究机制存在的行政问责制，其应当在问责主体、问责客体、问责范围、问责程序、问责内容、问责后果等方面作出限制。也只有建立此严格意义上的行政问责制才具有可行性和必要性，绝不能误认为行政问责制是包罗万象的责任综合体，更不能把行政问责制简化为引咎辞职。     

对完善我国行政问责制法律制度的思考

具备高度的责任心和负责精神,完善的责任机制和可问责机制,无疑是一个有效率和有公信力的现代政府所必须具备的品格,也是其活力的源泉。行政问责制是民主政治的一个组成部分,是实现责任政府的一个重要现实途径。本文对实施行政问责制的障碍进行了分析,提出了完善我国行政问责制的路径。     

Diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder and criminal responsibility

The present study empirically investigates whether personality disorders and psychopathic traits in criminal suspects are reasons for diminished criminal responsibility or enforced treatment in high security hospitals. Recently, the tenability of the claim that individuals with personality disorders and psychopathy can be held fully responsible for crimes has been questioned on theoretical bases. According to some interpretations, these disorders are due to cognitive, biological and developmental deficits that diminish the individual's accountability.The current article presents two studies among suspects of serious crimes under forensic evaluation in a Dutch forensic psychiatric observation clinic. The first study examined how experts weigh personality disorders in their conclusions as far as the degree of criminal responsibility and the need for enforced forensic psychiatric treatment are concerned (n = 843). The second study investigated associations between PCL-R scores and experts' responsibility and treatment advisements (n = 108).The results suggest that in Dutch forensic practice, the presence of a personality disorder decreased responsibility and led to an advice for enforced forensic treatment. Experts also take characteristics of psychopathy concerning impulsivity and (ir)responsibility into consideration when judging criminal accountability. Furthermore, they deem affective deficiencies sufficiently important to indicate suspects' threat to society or dangerousness and warrant a need for forensic treatment.     

试论行政问责制的伦理价值

行政问责制是民主政治的重要组成部分,其本身就是一个伦理课题,有着深厚的伦理价值：内含主权在民和平等正义的价值理念,内含对公共利益的追求,能克服经济人＂搭便车＂或机会主义行为,强调行政权力与行政责任的一致性,是政府实现行政责任的一种自律。     

Prison psychiatry and professional responsibility

Professional responsibility is a multifaceted concept embracing elements of technical competence and accountability. It may seem anachronistic to examine professional responsibility in the context of prison psychiatry, which is a relatively unpopular and often controversial health service activity. Upon closer scrutiny, however, it appears that prison psychiatry presents a paradigm of the uncertainties, conflicts, and dilemmas which underlie current concerns about professional responsibility in psychiatry. In this paper, the author examines some of these issues and proposes some tentative answers, focusing on the critical question of the proper roles of psychiatry in prisons.     

Advancing Accountability: Moving Toward Victim Restoration

One of the goals of Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system is the “imposition of accountability” for offenses committed. This White Paper, originally published in 2006, takes the position that true accountability requires juvenile offenders to repair the harm caused by their offending behavior and to understand and acknowledge the wrongfulness of their actions, their responsibility for causing harm, and the impact of the crime on the crime victim and community. It identifies system responsibilities, restorative practices, and outcomes relative to accountability. This White Paper was the result of debate among focus group participants under the auspices of the State Advisory Group.     

Human–algorithm hybrids as (quasi-)organizations? On the accountability of digital collective actors

Models of individual accountability for algorithms’ actions fail when a human–algorithm association comes to be viewed as a collective actor. In some situations, human and algorithmic actions are so closely intertwined that there is no longer a linear connection between the emergent collectivity and the complex interactions of humans and algorithms. In such collective decision-making sequences, individual accountability can no longer be attributed. Therefore, a new perspective on human–algorithm associations that captures their emergent properties and organizational qualities is needed to develop appropriate models of collective accountability. This article seeks to answer a number of questions. How can the encounter between humans and algorithms within such a socio-technical configuration be adequately theorized? Can the configuration itself be understood as a hybrid collectivity? Can actions be attributed to the configuration as a personified collective actor? How will accountability be institutionalized for human–algorithm associations – in centralized or distributed collective forms?     

少年司法改革制度中的检察帮教责任机制探析

少年司法改革制度中检察帮教责任机制是一个重要的程序和制度。这一制度有别于公安机关和审判机关的帮教责任机制。少年司法改革制度的司法机关帮教责任实践同时表明,在对现有少年司法帮教制度中相关人民检察院在少年司法改革制度中的帮教责任依然存在模糊和漏洞,需要分析检察机关在少年司法中的帮教责任机制特点,提出相应的改进建议及启用策略,完善检察帮教责任机制。     

Accountability in health care: an essay on mechanisms, muddles, and mires

This paper presents a critical evaluation of several theories of accountability and their applicability to health care concerns. The authors first provide a preliminary refinement of the imprecise concept of accountability itself and then examine four major types (political; bureaucratic; professional; and economic-consumer). Then, by using disciplinary perspectives provided by several schools of thought in political science (legislative supremacy; general manager theory; government by bureaucracy; objective responsibility; citizen participation), they discuss the degree of accountability presently found in various American health policies. After identifying the inherent dilemmmas within any credible accountability approach to health care programs as now utilized in the United States, the authors recommend that all types of accountability be integrated and strengthened by relying more explicitly on practices characteristic of development administration.     

行政问责制的社会法理究缘

在社会领域,政府行政责任是国家与社会对立统一关系的体征,是国家社会职能法律化的社会义务。行政问责制是社会体制法律化的必然结果,其中,政府社会责任被法律化为必须履行的社会义务,社会体制中主体的权利（力）义务（责任）的运行都成为法律化的结果,为实现这一法律化的要求,行政问责制便成为必然。     

浅析行政问责制的内涵及其理论基础

行政问责制作为现代政府强化责任与改善管理的一种制度创新,蕴涵着极为深刻的政治理论价值.但是,在我国政治领域推进的过程中,由于对行政问责制内涵认识的模糊性以及对其理论基础理解的主观随意性,致使一些原本致力于建设责任政府的政策安排反而偏离了行政问责制的内在诉求.因此,要构建责任政府、法治政府,就必须深刻理解行政问责制的丰富内涵及其理论基础.