行政裁量控制的模式选择——硬法控制模式的失灵催生混合法控制模式

法律设定行政裁量的初衷是借助能动行政的公共选择解决私人选择的非理性问题,但对行政裁量的控制不力会诱发裁量滥用,造成公共选择的非理性,为此,人们试图运用技术、技巧和制度等元素来控制裁量.本文将行政裁量的法制控制区分为硬法控制、软法控制和软硬并重的混合法控制三种模式.本文认为,当下要解决裁量控制不力问题,一方面要将裁量设定的"以授定控"理念转变为"量控为授",根据混合法的实际控制力设定行政裁量范围;另一方面要更新"法即硬法"的传统法律观念,在继续强化硬法控制力的同时高度关注软法品质的提升,据此建构一种软硬并重的混合法控制模式.     

论中国古代的“六事法体系”

中国古代采取"官法同构"的制度建构基本模式,根据国家事务管理需要,设置官制;根据官吏治理需要,建立法制,进而实现"治官"与"治民"的双重目标。从汉唐至明清,官制经历了从"三公九卿"到"三省六部""六部"体制的演进,法制则经历了"六事法体系"的萌芽、建立、成熟、完善等发展阶段。至明清之时,与中央六部官制相对应,以吏事法、户事法、礼事法、兵事法、刑事法、工事法为主体的"六事法体系"成熟、完善。通过对于"户事法"的透视,可以看到,"六事法体系"对于国家事务与社会关系形成广泛覆盖,基本实现了对于文武百官、社会万民的全面调整。这一法律体系,符合古代国情,满足古代治国理政需要,并在维护国家统一、构建社会秩序等方面发挥重要作用;这一法律体系,既体现了中国古代国家治理、社会管理方式的鲜明特色,也展示了中华民族的政治智慧与法律智慧。     

发现中国"混合法"——一个中国法学概念的学术史考察

中国传统法律文化经过数千年的发展,形成了成文法与判例法互相结合、相辅相成的混合法,自汉代定型之后历代沿袭相随.武树臣教授发现并提出了中国"混合法"的概念,断言"混合法"是中国数千年法律实践的最大特征,也是祖先奉献给全人类的伟大宝藏,还是西方两大法系未来发展的共同趋向.     

亚洲法研究:过去、现在与未来

亚洲法研究始于二十世纪五、六十年代的美国,其后在欧洲、亚洲国家陆续展开。存在两种主要的亚洲法研究进路,一是以"法律与发展理论"为代表的西方法律视角;一是基于亚洲法的内部立场。美国的"法律与发展理论"经历了三个阶段的发展历程,各个阶段有其自身的特征。亚洲的亚洲法研究始于日本,韩国、中国等国家也正逐步展开,但其也存在若干困难。未来的亚洲法研究需要亚洲国家加强合作以及建立起对亚洲法的身份认同。     

中国"混合法"引论

"混合法"是中国法律文化的内在传统,它作为一种内在的传统深刻地影响并塑造着中国古代社会乃至现代社会的法律实践活动.中国的"混合法"根植于古典社会的生活实践活动,表现在古文字系统、思想价值、法律规范和人法并重的治理方略之中.它不仅是一种实际的历史存在,而且延续至今依然表现着强大的生命力,尤其是在当代世界法律文化日益走向融合之际,"混合法"的理论和现实价值显得更为突出.     

混合法律文化研究与外国法律史学科的发展

人类漫长的法制发展历程始终交织着不同法律文化间的传承、交流与融合,并逐渐形成不同的法系或法律传统.然而,由于诸多复杂的因素,某些国家或地区的法律往往兼具两个甚至更多法系或法律传统的特征,很难归于某个特定类型的法系或法律传统,于是比较法学家们在困惑与思考中获得了新的启示."混合法律文化"、"混合法律体系"、"混合法"等概念由此应运而生,并不断在理论和实践中被认知和发展.特别是伴随着欧洲一体化进程的加速和当代世界法制发展的新趋向,混合法律文化成为越来越多学者关注和研究的学术前沿问题之一.     

罪刑法定原则引入中国历程考

作为刑法基本原则的罪刑法定原则,对中国来说,是一种舶来品.但在中国法制近代化的历史上,罪刑法定原则的引入是一个具有标志性的重大历史事件.罪刑法定的思想在鸦片战争以前的19世纪30年代传入中国.1911年颁布的《大清新刑律》第一次以法律的形式确立了罪刑法定原则.从罪刑法定思想流入中国,直到将"罪刑法定"一词作为对西方"法无明文规定不为罪,法无明文规定不处刑"的概称,大约经历了近一个世纪的漫长历程.     

中国法制近代化过程中的三部著作权法

一、中国近代三部著作权法 1898年,光绪皇帝实行"新政",从此中国法制近代化的事业开始萌动.1902年,清廷命沈家本、伍廷芳为修律大臣,设修订法律馆,开始翻译欧美各国法律并拟订中国之新型法律.在中国民商事法制近代化过程中,著作权法也经历了一个从个别的公告特许到普遍的法律授与的快速变化,并陆续在清末、北洋和国民政府时期推出了三部著作权法.     

认真对待软法——公域软法的一般理论及其中国实践

我国最近20多年的公域之治一直在实践着一种软硬兼施的混合法结构,这在相当程度上彰显出民主政治与法治建设的中国特色。本文认为,包含着大量本土性制度资源的“软法”,是一种法律效力结构未必完整、无需依靠国家强制保障实施、但能够产生社会实效的法律规范。软法与硬法同为法律的一种基本表现形式,它以不同于硬法的方式体现法律的基本特征、实现法律的主要功能,并具有严格区别于硬法的个性特征与独特功能。软法与硬法大致具有法律逻辑上的错综复杂、法律功能上的优势互补、法律规范上的相互转化三种基本关系。软硬兼施的混合法模式乃是我国解决公共问题的基本模式,这就要求我国公法学回应公域之治的现实需要,在对软法作用加以客观评析的基础上,研究探讨全面提升公域软法的理性品质,并按照宪政精神与法治原则的要求推动中国公法朝着软硬兼施的混合法结构方向发展,旨在全面实现公域之治与法治目标。     

“案例指导制度”的历史探寻

判例法和成文法相结合,就是混合法。历史上,中国经历了三次判例法和成文法的结合。以下简单回顾一下中国混合法的三次“轮回”。     

Legal skills and the SQE: confronting the challenge head on

Whether the teaching and assessment of practical legal skills and professional conduct should be focused at the academic or vocational stage of legal education has been considered numerous times, with recommendations made and varying degrees of implementation carried out. With the approval of the Solicitors Qualifying Examination being granted by the Legal Services Board this issue is once again being brought into focus. The end of the Legal Practice Course will result in the required compulsory teaching and assessment of core practical legal skills and professional conduct being removed from legal education. The question therefore is whether legal education should incorporate practical legal skills and professional conduct into teaching and assessment at the academic stage and, if so, how can this be achieved in a way that complements rather than distracts from the study of academic law. This study will consider the recommendations made in relation to practical legal skills and professional conduct over the last five decades and identify possible options for the embedding of practical legal skills and professional conduct in the law curriculum at undergraduate level.     

社会科学在司法裁判中的运用原理与方法

法学界对于社会科学在司法裁判中运用的研究源于对以逻辑演绎方法为核心的科学主义在法学中支配地位的反思和以经验主义为核心的社会科学在法学中的兴起。为了确保进入裁判性事实认定领域的社会科学具有权威性和说服力,社会科学必须借助相应的证据规则。社会科学知识作为证据的准入标准经历了一个从普遍认同标准到科学有效性标准的转变。社会学解释方法和社会框架是社会科学在法律适用过程中加以运用的两种方式。社会学解释方法在法律适用过程中的运用应当以法律存在多种相互冲突的解释或存在"隐藏的漏洞"为前提,找寻法律概念所包含的肯定选项或者中性选项,并遵循比例原则和受到法律规范性质的约束。社会框架的运用必须以尊重本国文化传统和日常基本逻辑为前提,并结合其他因素,以充分发挥社会框架的效力。     

法治30年的回顾、反思与展望——第一届齐鲁法学论坛述评

与30年的改革开放同步,中国法治经历了一个理论不断革新、制度不断完善的发展过程。第一届齐鲁法学论坛以"回顾、反思、展望"为主线,回顾和总结了30年来的法治历程与经验,反思和展望今后的发展道路。论坛研讨了刑法学、行政法学、民商法学、司法制度、法学研究、学科建设、法学教育等主题,蕴含着丰富的思想含量。今后我们的法学研究还要进一步拓宽视域、提升层次,使之具有国际视野,积极融入全球法学发展进程之中。     

The legal status of clinical and ethics policies, codes, and guidelines in medical practice and research

This article examines the legal status of "soft law" in the fields of medicine and medical research. Many areas of clinical practice and research involve complex and rapidly changing issues for which the law provides no guidance. Instead, guidance for physicians and researchers comes from what has often been called "soft law"--non-legislative, non-regulatory sources, such as ethics policy statements, codes, and guidelines from professional or quasi-governmental bodies. This article traces the evolution of these "soft law" instruments: how they are created, how they are adopted within the professional community, and how they become accepted by the courts. It studies the relationship between soft law instruments and the courts. It includes an examination of the approaches to judicial analysis used by the courts in theory and in practice. The authors then examine the jurisprudence to see how courts will adopt professional norms as the legal standard of care in some circumstances and not others. They consider the legal concerns and ethical issues surrounding the weight attached to professional practices and norms in law. The authors demonstrate how practices and policies that guide professional conduct may ultimately bear weight as norms recognizable and enforceable within the legal sphere.     

日本法科大学院教育制度及其特征

法科大学院是日本的新型法律人才培养机构。这一制度借鉴了美国法学院教育模式,招收具有多样专业知识背景的学生,开展研究生层次的职业化教育。建立法科大学院制度是日本在司法改革的大背景下,在扩大法律职业数量和确保法律职业培养质量的目标下,做出的制度选择。日本通过了相关法律,并派遣在职法官、检察官任教,以保证法科大学院具有充分的师资,保证法科大学院教育的质量。     

试论日本法学教育改革之得失检讨与经验借鉴

东亚国家的现代法学教育大多起源于19世纪末期,定型于20世纪中期,早已在岁月的冲刷下千疮百孔,无力承担建设完善法治社会的重任,急需发动大规模的改革加以修补。在这种情势之下,日本率先发动了法学教育改革,其以建立法科大学院为基础,以推行法学教育职业化与精英化为导向,以设置新型司法考试制度为保障。日本的举措既有成功经验可供借鉴,又有失败教训应当汲取,为我国法学教育的改革提供了有益的启示。     

Values ethics and legal ethics: the QLD and LETR Recommendations 6, 7, 10, and 11

The Legal Education and Training Review (LETR) Report recommended increased attention to ethics and values and to critical thinking. These aims could be achieved jointly through teaching ethical thinking: not as theory but as part of developing the capacity for ethical conduct. Such a pedagogy has the potential to become a qualifying law degree (QLD) signature pedagogy supporting “life-narratives” of students. The LETR Report recommends a review of the QLD emphasising legal values and ethics. Concern with values and ethics is linked to concern with professional conduct. Maintaining the law degree as a general or liberal qualification is also strongly desired. These potentially conflicting drivers generate ambivalence towards legal ethics as a subject for study, especially if legal ethics are perceived as teaching the professional codes.

Resolution of this tension is achievable through recognising the potential role of ethical teaching as part of an identity apprenticeship. Developing ethical character is as much a liberal as a professional aim. Ethics teaching can play an integrative role in the QLD. Formation of student identity is a central part of higher education taking colouration from being situated in legal education. In this context teaching legal ethics becomes the use of a salient example for carrying out the broader project of developing ethical capacity.     

Debate over the concept of the competent lawyer in Japan “What skills and attitudes does Japanese society expect from lawyers?”

It has been 2 years since legal education reform started in Japan. The Justice System Reform Council envisioned the 21st century lawyer as a lawyer who “not only has highly developed professional legal knowledge but also has acquired strong legal ethics based on wide cultural knowledge and rich humanity” (Recommendations of the Justice System Reform Council—For a Justice System to Support Japan in the 21st Century—(June 21, 2001)). Since then, all interested parties have been trying to specify the qualifications needed to be a competent lawyer: What lawyering skills and professional attitudes does Japanese society expect from lawyers; how can they be acquired; and how can they be examined or evaluated? In this paper, I first briefly describe the traditional legal training system and the traditional image of the lawyer in Japan. Second, I look at the history of legal training system reform; summarize images of the lawyer each that interested party envisions, and review the current status of the reform. Then, I explore the optimum way to reinforce the quality and quantity of the legal profession in Japan.     

关于建立我国司法考试及训练制度的构想

大多数有良好法治秩序的国家都是通过国家司法考试培养和选拔所需职业法律家的。我国《法官法》、《检察官法》修正案虽然已将国家司法考试写入立法 ,但司法考试的具体内容还缺乏法律的明确规定。国家司法考试应包括法官、检察官、律师三种职业资格 ;报考者应有坚定的信念、大学教育背景和良好品行 ;考试程式及内容设计应能全面检测报考者的文化素养、法律专业知识和从业能力。     

The Protection of Reputation in Japan: A Systematic Analysis of Defamation Cases

Although Japanese defamation law has been a subject of legal interest for scholars and judges, their main focus was the defamation rules that appeared in cases publicized by legal reporters. The following study coded 232 defamation cases against the media that were decided in district courts in Japan, according to the type of database that reported the cases. Statistical results reveal that newspapers are more likely to report defamation cases than other databases because stories about defamation cases may satisfy readers' interest or because the newspaper might have been informed by plaintiffs who won their cases. The results also show that the professional status of the plaintiff is a predictor of the case outcome. Politicians and officials are less likely to win in defamation cases than are executives and criminals, and they received lower damages than athletes and entertainers.