比例原则审查基准的构建与适用

构建类型化的比例原则审查基准体系,是实现司法能动主义下司法监督功能的现实需要,是克服比例原则的抽象性缺陷以增加司法理性的必然要求。对于行为目的与手段的正当性进行区分强度的司法审查,已成为发展趋势之一。比例原则在我国得到了日益广泛地适用,但大量案件似乎都只是宽松审查。应根据比例原则的规范内涵与逻辑结构,综合考量受侵害权利的属性与种类、侵害的方式与程度、公共利益的属性与种类、事务的专业性程度等因素,构建比例原则的宽松审查、中度审查和严格审查三种审查基准类型。比例原则审查基准的类型化不应成为终极追求目标,法官在个案中的合比例性裁量需要限缩,但不应受到过度挤压。     

行政判决中比例原则的适用

通过分析比例原则适用第一案后20年间的典型案例可以发现,比例原则在我国的适用已从行政处罚扩张到多种行政行为领域。比例原则已成为法院评判行政行为实质合法性的重要准则。法院可以根据"滥用职权"和"明显不当"标准,对行政行为进行合比例性审查。对于目的正当性和手段的适当性、必要性、均衡性的规范认识还存在一定的分歧,审查标准并不统一。在合比例性举证责任上,一些案件并没有完全遵循行政诉讼举证责任倒置规则。在合比例性审查强度上,似乎大多是宽松审查或低密度审查。对于行政行为是否符合比例原则,法官在个案中有着巨大的裁量空间,但大多数判决论证说理还较为简单。作为人权保障利剑的比例原则,势必在我国得到更加广泛地适用,合比例性分析方法与技术有待进一步提高,其未来适用应注意确定性与灵活性的平衡。     

论税法解释类型化方法

传统税法解释类型化方法以"事物本质"作为类型化的基础,从"简驭繁、统一公平课税与提高行政效率"的目的价值推演出稽征经济原则、课税平等原则和私人领域之尊重这三大立论依据。但在实践中,由"事物本质"概念模糊性产生的过度类型化等行为,动摇了稽征经济原则与课税平等原则,其合法性问题一直困扰着实务界与理论界。类型化方法在税法解释中的适用应在解决立法意旨的"存在"与"认知"存疑的前提之下,将其与立法意旨相结合。立法意旨有助于人们认定税法规范中的类型标准、框架,继而依据类型标准、框架判定税法现象、事实是否符合税法规范所规定的相关类型,以图缓解"事物本质"所引发的适用争议。     

合宪性、合法性、适当性审查的区别与联系

成立全国人大宪法和法律委员会为推进合宪性审查工作提供了组织保障,并将问题转向"如何开展合宪性审查工作"。长期以来,我国针对规范性文件的审查存在三种模式,即合宪性审查、合法性审查、适当性审查。从审查实践来看,三者界限的模糊已经严重影响了合宪性审查功能的发挥,因此有必要对三者的区别进行厘清。合宪性审查、合法性审查、适当性审查最主要的不同体现在审查内容上。一方面,合宪性审查的本质是对下位的初级规则是否违反作为初级规则效力基础的次级规则进行审查,合法性审查的本质则是审查下位的初级规则是否抵触上位的初级规则;另一方面,合宪性审查是审查下位法是否违反宪法中规定的"什么是有效的立法"的标准,包括形式标准和实质标准,而合法性审查则主要审查下位法是否符合上位法的立法目的。同时,与合宪性审查和合法性审查都针对下位法是否超越上位法设定的框架不同,适当性审查是在上位法的框架内针对下位法的立法裁量是否适当进行审查,过度禁止、不足禁止和恣意禁止分别构成了立法裁量权行使的上限、下限和边限。合宪性审查、合法性审查、适当性审查三者虽然存在不同,但也具有联系。在实际操作中,应当遵循"先合法性审查、再合宪性审查、最后适当性审查"的阶层性审查次序。     

比例原则在美国合宪性审查中的类型化运用及其成因

自20世纪中叶以来,德国宪法法院的相关理论与实务有力推动了比例原则的全球化。比例原则在其全球化进程中,其实践形式较为多样、灵活。美国尽管并未明确形成以"比例原则"命名的宪法教义,但实质上比例原则在它的合宪性审查中仍有广泛使用。比例原则在美国合宪性审查中的运用呈现出类型化的特点,比例原则的类型化运用始于"洛克纳"案,成熟于"三重审查标准"的确立。比例原则的此种运用方式在相当程度上源于美国的制度文化传统,基本权利的"王牌"观、"遵循先例"的判例法传统、三权分立制衡的联邦制,共同促成了比例原则的类型化运用。     

行政立法性事实研究

行政立法既存在合法性问题,也存在立法性事实的客观性、合理性和可采性问题。行政立法性事实不同于裁决性事实和立法意见,假象事实和仿真陈述经常对行政立法性事实的客观性和真实性造成干扰。行政立法性事实与法律规范之间存在互动关系和逻辑推理关系;行政立法的民主方式决定了立法性事实的收集和认定方式,并影响着立法性事实的客观性和真实性;行政立法性事实的审查应当包括立法性事实的合法性和合理性、立法性事实与法律规范之间因果关系的合理性、立法性事实收集和认定的合法性和合理性、立法性事实的审查强度等方面。     

行政合理性原则审查强度之类型化——基于行政诉讼典型案例的解析与整合

合理性原则是行政法上的一项基本原则,也是人民法院对行政行为进行审查的重要标准。本文指出了行政合理性审查在本质上涉及行政权和司法权二者的关系,分析了当前司法实践中法院对合理性审查强度把握不准的现象,并认为实现行政合理性原则审查强度的类型化将十分有助于规范司法实践操作,提升法院把握与行政权关系的能力。接下来,本文指出行政机关的裁量空间、法院的分工和能力、限制权益的类型和效果以及法律的价值取向是影响合理性审查强度的因素。在此基础上,本文认为在具体的案件中,审查强度的选择往往是不同因素之间比较和权衡的结果,运用类型化的研究方法,可以在这些因素与具体的案件之间建立联系。本文认为,合理性原则的审查强度可以分为宽松的、增进的和严格的审查强度三种类型,从而为法院确定个案审查强度提供了参照样本和规则。     

个人信息处理中比例原则审查基准体系的建构

随着《个人信息保护法》从立法论转向适用论，如何具体适用个人信息处理的“合法、正当、必要、不得过度”原则，是规范适用者不得不面对的现实问题。通过在个人信息处理中构建类型化的比例原则审查基准体系，对于具体的信息处理行为进行检验，可以划定合比例限制个人信息权益的界限，促使适用机关合理且一贯地适用个人信息处理原则。在目的正当性审查基准构建中，基于不同信息处理依据，通过粗疏过滤的方式，确定信息处理的积极或消极审查基准；在必要性审查基准构建中，基于风险评估结果与目的—手段关联程度，划分信息权益限制的“相对最小”“接近最小”“绝对最小”三重审查基准；在均衡性审查基准构建中，基于个案中不同处理情形所产生的“损”与“益”，区分宽松、严格不同层次的合比例性审查基准。通过个人信息处理中比例原则审查基准体系构建，增加处理原则的适用理性，提高审查结果预测可能性，以期实现个人信息所承载多方利益的平衡保护。     

论行政公告行为的司法救济

行政公告行为不同于传统的行政行为类型化讨论中的行政行为,它是以告知方式的公开普遍性为标准分类的行政行为,具有主体的职权性、性质的多样性、方式的公开性三个特征。行政公告的法律性质具有不同表现形态。在目前的立法框架下,性质上为具体行政行为的公告应该可以纳入司法审查的范围。行政事实行为状态的公告如果对相对人的权利有影响,则应当纳入司法审查的范围。抽象行政行为类型的公告则只能有条件地纳入司法审查。     

论平等就业权限制的合理性审查模式——以复合结构下的双重审查为主线

对平等就业权限制的合理性判断有赖于一套相对客观且便于操作的审查模式。平等就业权是复合性权利,包含职业选择自由和平等权两项权利。在这一复合结构下,宜采用"平行审查"的方式,即对两项权利分别审查后作出最终判断,对每一项权利的审查则可采用类型化多元审查标准。在这个基本框架下,职业选择自由以合理审查标准为主,平等权的审查标准可吸收德国法区分一般平等原则和特别平等原则的做法。审查步骤以双重审查为主线展开,分为事实要件的确定、审查标准的选定、规范层面的评价、审查结果的处理四个步骤。     

Is state power to protect health compatible with substantive due process rights?

Public health laws may mandate drastic limitations on individual liberty, such as forced medication and quarantine. This results in a tension between public health laws and guarantees of liberty such as the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court has resolved this tension in favor of one or the other of these legal principles, depending on the facts and issues involved. Nevertheless, Supreme Court jurisprudence is internally consistent. The Court has applied a level of scrutiny that, while rigorous, is more flexible than strict scrutiny. I denote this as "enhanced public health scrutiny." Applying this scrutiny, the Court will uphold public health legislation if it protects an inchoate class of people who may not yet be identifiable, who will incur a specific disease or injury absent the law, but who will not experience this disease or injury if the law is enforced. If this doctrine were explicit, it would constitute a clear guideline to courts seeking to balance health and liberty concerns. This guideline would be consistent with current case law, and would not impact on law affecting reproductive liberty.     

Post-legislative scrutiny in the UK Parliament: adding value

ABSTRACT

Legislatures appoint committees for different purposes. Both Houses of the UK Parliament separate legislative committees from non-legislative, or select, committees. Each is unusual in that it utilises select committees to engage in post-legislative scrutiny. We examine why each engages in this type of scrutiny, given competing demands for limited resources. Distributive and informational theories are utilised to explain the difference between the two chambers, identifying why the form of asymmetrical bicameralism to be found in the United Kingdom facilitates scrutiny that would otherwise not be undertaken. The genesis and impact of post-legislative scrutiny committees are considered, with a focus on the House of Lords and why the use of such committees plays to the strengths of the House.     

The changing landscape of higher education: an analysis of how national change might be brought about in American higher education compared with the Bologna signatory states

Throughout much of the world higher education has been subject to scrutiny, including for example cost, outcomes, stakeholder value, and change. The intensity of the scrutiny and the possible consequences in terms of change have accelerated as a result of 2009 being the year of financial turbulence and scarce resources being used to prop up failing industries such as the automobile industry, compounded by measures such as quantitative easing and huge amounts being made available to the banking sector. This article looks at the different contexts and legal frameworks regarding change being required as a result of legislation rather than happening through some organic way. The article does not focus on the merits of possible change but on how change may be brought about. The European context is that of the Bologna Process (with a brief reminder of the European Union's competency in this area), the US context is that of change at national, regional or state level but with the primary focus being national level change.     

Legislation Under Review: An Assessment of Post-Legislative Scrutiny Recommendations in the UK Parliament

Post-legislative scrutiny allows Parliament to revisit legislation after it has been enacted to ensure that it is operating as intended. As most literature on the UK legislative process suggests that is not optimal, this is an important task that committees can undertake to ensure that any problems can be located and rectified. This paper reports the findings of a systematic study of the outcomes of post-legislative scrutiny in terms of the types of recommendations being made, whether they are being accepted by the government, and what factors impact upon the acceptance of those recommendations. It concludes that there is a bias in the legislation being selected to receive post-legislative scrutiny and that committees, on the whole, are producing weaker recommendations which are more likely to be accepted. Additionally, it concludes that the stronger the action that a recommendation calls for, the more likely it is to be rejected.     

The suitability of visual taphonomic methods for digital photographs: An experimental approach with pig carcasses in a tropical climate

In the context of increased scrutiny of the methods in forensic sciences, it is essential to ensure that the approaches used in forensic taphonomy to measure decomposition and estimate the postmortem interval are underpinned by robust evidence-based data. Digital photographs are an important source of documentation in forensic taphonomic investigations but the suitability of the current approaches for photographs, rather than real-time remains, is poorly studied which can undermine accurate forensic conclusions. The present study aimed to investigate the suitability of 2D colour digital photographs for evaluating decomposition of exposed human analogues (Sus scrofa domesticus) in a tropical savanna environment (Hawaii), using two published scoring methods; Megyesi et al., 2005 and Keough et al., 2017. It was found that there were significant differences between the real-time and photograph decomposition scores when the Megyesi et al. method was used. However, the Keough et al. method applied to photographs reflected real-time decomposition more closely and thus appears more suitable to evaluate pig decomposition from 2D photographs. The findings indicate that the type of scoring method used has a significant impact on the ability to accurately evaluate the decomposition of exposed pig carcasses from photographs. It was further identified that photographic taphonomic analysis can reach high inter-observer reproducibility. These novel findings are of significant importance for the forensic sciences as they highlight the potential for high quality photograph coverage to provide useful complementary information for the forensic taphonomic investigation. New recommendations to develop robust transparent approaches adapted to photographs in forensic taphonomy are suggested based on these findings.     

Audience Measurement and Media Policy: Audience Economics,the Diversity Principle,and the Local People Meter

Professor Gerald Gunther famously declared strict scrutiny to be “‘strict’ in theory and fatal in fact” in 1972. Although Professor Gunther's pithy and influential slogan may have been a reasonably accurate characterization at that time, strict scrutiny in the realm of the First Amendment is now much less fatal to government regulation of expression. This article explores the beginnings of the strict scrutiny test and the underpinnings of its subsequent dilution. The article examines the multiple ways courts can avoid applying strict scrutiny and argues that compelling state interests are proliferating in a manner that is harmful to robust speech protection. It also critiques the lack of precision in narrow tailoring analysis. The article concludes that First Amendment strict scrutiny has serious weaknesses that threaten to undermine vigorous protection for expression and offers suggestions for increasing the rigor and precision of the doctrine.     

IRS General Counsel Memorandum threatens some hospital-physician joint ventures

To defend against the heightened scrutiny of hospital-physician relations expected from the IRS, hospital management should closely examine any activities now conducted with physicians to determine whether each activity, as organized and operated, furthers the hospital's charitable mission of promoting the health of its community, rather than merely enhancing the financial health of the institution itself. Any arrangements that do not appear to satisfy the principles enunciated in GCM 39862 should be examined to see if they should be restructured or dissolved. In structuring new transactions and examining existing arrangements, the following principles should be kept in mind: 1. Transactions should not be premised upon increased utilization or physician referrals. Enhancing or protecting market share, even for the purpose of preserving an institution's presence in the community, will likely no longer be accepted as a justification for pursuing joint venture arrangements. In justifying such ventures, management must distinguish between benefit to the community and benefit to the institution. 2. Transactions whereby existing services or equipment are "spun off" to a hospital-physician joint venture run a serious risk of enhanced IRS scrutiny. 3. Transactions creating or providing new facilities or services should be more favorably perceived, particularly where participants other than the hospital take an active role in managing the venture. Where the hospital is the sole general partner and merely manages what it would have managed had there been no physician investors, the question of why physicians are involved will likely be of greater concern than it has been in the past.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

The Spanish Parliament and EU Affairs in the Post Lisbon Treaty Era: All Change?

The new provisions on national parliaments in the Lisbon Treaty were welcomed with scepticism by some scholars and with hope by others. Sometime after the new provisions came into force, their impact on the role of national parliaments in the EU can already be examined. This article looks into the effect of the implementation of the Early Warning Mechanism and the other provisions on the parliamentary scrutiny of EU affairs in Spain. It also reflects on the possible implications for the EU political system. Although the scope and actual effect of the new measures have been quite modest, the new regulations allow for a better scrutiny of EU law, a tighter control of the executive on EU affairs and closer cooperation with EU institutions.     

Party system change and parliamentary scrutiny of the executive in Italy

Conventional wisdom suggests that internal institutionalisation of parliamentary procedures causes greater policy effects on executive decisions and secondary legislation. The role played by parliaments in policy-making depends on internal processes, but it also depends on other factors, such as the changing structure of the party system – the bipolarisation of which determines the legislative opposition's strategy and performance. The empirical research discussed in this paper shows that the Italian parliamentary process for approving and implementing secondary legislation changed considerably – from pervasive and substantive to formalistic and procedural – during the 1990s, as a result of the parliamentary opposition behaving differently in response to the accomplished alternation in government. Despite the greater institutionalisation of the Italian Parliament, parliamentary scrutiny of secondary legislation has in fact had a diminishing impact on policy. This paper evaluates the increasingly limited power of parliamentary committees to amend delegated legislation in draft against a comparative analysis of the law-making process and performance of the opposition. The effect on policy of parliamentary scrutiny of secondary legislation is found to be proportionately related to consociational practices during the legislative process. The scrutiny of parliaments is greater when the balance between the legislative majority and opposition is characterised by consociational practices.     

Evidence-informed or value-based? exploring the scrutiny of legislation in the UK Parliament

This article argues that three types of factor – process, subject and political circumstance – are likely to affect the extent to which claims of evidence are made during legislative scrutiny. It draws upon case studies of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998, the Academies Act 2010 and the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016, utilising interviews with those involved and information from Hansard. The article concludes that these cases highlight that while there might be potential benefits from a yet more robust legislative scrutiny process, including greater use of pre-legislative scrutiny and the ability of public bill committees to take evidence from a wider range of witnesses and on all bills, subject and political factors would be likely to mean that the use of claims of evidence would continue to vary widely.