Necessity Exceptions in WTO Law: Retreaded Tyres, Regulatory Purpose and Cumulative Regulatory Measures

The recent decisions of the panel and Appellate Body in Brazil– Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres touchedupon a number of issues of ongoing significance to the applicationof necessity tests, such as those in Article XX of the GeneralAgreement on Tariffs and Trade. This article argues that thedispute represents a mixed outcome for the application of necessitytests. The express recognition that some regulatory measuresare complementary to one another rather than reasonably availablealternatives constitutes a welcome step forward. On the otherhand, the panel's characterization of Brazil's regulatory goalhighlights an approach common to a number of panel reports thatcould justify a perception of arbitrariness in application ofnecessity tests. Similarly, comments made by the Appellate Bodyto the effect that a panel is obliged to consider the importanceof a state's regulatory goal extend the role of a panel in anunjustifiable manner.     

法律的根本目的在于保障人的尊严

人的尊严表征着人是主体、目的,而非工具、手段,拥有不可侵犯与不可剥夺的尊严,是法律主体概念得以成立的基础。就现代社会而言,法律的根本目的即在于保障人的尊严的实现,人的精神性存在的特质,决定了体面而有尊严的生活为人们的根本追求。在保障人的尊严得以实施的路径上,必须从立法、执法、司法、守法等各个层面,来保障人的尊严得以存立的根基。     

“废考运动”与学校考试改革

五四时期,伴随着新教育观念的流行和学生自主意识的觉醒,引发了人们对考试现状的不满和思考,发展为废考运动。同时,以教育、心理测量学为基础形成的科学考试理论,作为西方教育理论的重要组成部分被引入中国,掀起了测验运动,并倡导运用教育测量学的原理对传统学校考试进行改革,提倡新法考试。经过多年探索,有力地推动了我国学校考试的科学化改革。     

论《刑法》第133条之1的规范目的及其适用

醉酒型危险驾驶罪是过失犯罪,其成立要件是,行为人故意在道路上醉酒驾驶了机动车,但对其醉酒驾驶行为所引起的公共安全的抽象危险仅仅存在过失。对故意在道路上醉酒驾驶机动车并故意引起公共安全的抽象危险的行为,应当认定为以危险方法危害公共安全罪的未遂犯。在确定拘役的期限时,要以血液里的酒精含量为基准,同时考虑案件的各种具体情节;在计算罚金的数额时,要以行为人的税后月收入为基准,同时考虑行为人血液里的酒精含量。在道路上醉酒驾驶机动车而成立的危险驾驶罪,完全可能由于发生了严重的实害结果而转化为其它犯罪,或者由于行为人主观意思的质变而被其它犯罪所吸收,从而需要按照发生了转化或者吸收结果的重罪来处罚。     

The Shadows of the Law: Contemporary Approaches to Regulation and the Problem of Regulatory Conflict

Regulatory analyses often assume that compliance is desirable, with literature focusing on strategies to encourage "excellence" in adherence to regulatory goals. Yet, it is not unusual for disparate regulatory goals to exist that are based on competing values of what constitutes the "good society." It is this conflict that forms the substance of this paper. In cases of competing regulatory goals, techniques that encourage exemplary compliance in one area can create incentives to breach regulatory provisions of a competing regime. In such cases, generic regulatory techniques are unable to provide a useful means for resolving regulatory conflict but do allow a political delegation of conflict resolution to the "scientific" strategies of the regulator. In turn, the regulator places responsibility on companies for resolving competing regulatory demands. Successive delegation leads to juridification as well as regulators vying to retain primacy for their regime. This problem is examined through analysis of responsibilities for subcontractor safety under Australian health and safety law and sections of the Australian Trade Practices Act 1974 aimed at protecting competition.     

Threats of Armed Force and Contemporary International Law

Netherlands International Law Review -     

Ranking the Law Schools: The Reality of Illusion?

This article examines the problems inherent in any endeavor to rank law schools on a qualitative basis. Analysis of possible ranking criteria forces the conclusion that attempting to assign specific rankings based on objective criteria is a futile task. However, objective tests are suggested which indicate, on application to available data, that about 40 of the approximately 165 ABA-AALS-accredited law schools are of superior quality and differ among themselves only as to an image of prestige.     

Values and Purpose in Government: Central-local Relations in Regulatory Perspective

This paper explores the relationship between theories of regulation and governmentality, showing how a synthesis of the two approaches may be used in the analysis of central-local relations. The basis of the current trend towards greater partnership and cooperation in the regulation of local by central government is argued to lie in the linking of increasingly selective imperium and dominium controls with 'responsibilization' strategies involving techniques of accounting, audit, and contracting. Following Nonet and Selznick, the substantive and purposive nature of state action is placed at the centre of the analysis. In this perspective, the ideal of responsive regulation implies not just technical effectiveness, but the harnessing of regulatory forces and 'governmental' resources in endeavours to achieve legitimate regulatory objectives. While New Labour's regulatory style is more likely to prove effective than that of the Conservatives, it may be criticized for a similar failure to implement fundamental values of openness and participation in the determination of regulatory purposes.     

论民事证据法的目的--与李浩教授商榷

民事证据法的目的分为根本目的(或最终目的)和直接目的(或第二层次的目的)两个层次.民事证据法的根本目的是保护当事人合法的民事权益;直接目的是"公正证明程序".民事证据法的任务是发现真实,民事证据法根本目的的实现依赖于发现真实任务的完成.发现真实必须遵从一定的程序,而这一程序必须是在民事证据法目的的指引下所确立的程序.这一程序内含实体公正、程序公正和效率三个要求.     

依法执政的法意省思

依法执政是中国作为执政党的中国共产党在新形势下执政方式的重大调整和深刻转变,是在依法治国、建设社会主义法治国家的时代背景下执政党执政理念法治化的根本体现,也是顺民心遂民愿的明智之举。依法执政理念要作为指引执政党执政实践的正确航标,本身需要从法治而非人治的视角进行明确的梳理和辩思。     

HIDDEN ALLOCATORS: Administrative Law Judges and Regulatory Reform

The 1132 administrative law judges now serving in twenty-nine of the most important agencies of the national government are among the least understood and least studied authorities in the American political system, yet they are among the most powerful authorities in the modern policy process. ALJs have undergone a repid development from the creation of the office of "hearing examiner" in the Hepburn Act of 1906 to the rpesent djay, when they hear cases cfomparable in importance to those heard by federal district judges. ALHs are selected through a merit procedure almost wholly controlled by the agencies in which they are employed and are subject to constant cross-pressures from their judicial role and their administrative masters. Perceived problems of biased selection procedures, conflicts of interest, and lack of public accountability have led critics in Congress and elsewhere to propose a variety of marginal reforms. The policy proposal that probably gets to the heart of the problem, however, is the creation of an Administrative Court of the United States.     

美国法学院教育体制简介

美国有188所由美国律师协会(ABA)认可的法学院,其中除了一所TheJudgeAdvocateGeneral’sSchool为美国陆军的军校之外,另外187所法学院校每年大約招收3.6万多名的全日制法律学生及约7000名的选读法律学生。所有被ABA认可的法学院,其毕业生均可以参加美国各州的律师考试,大约80%以上的法律学生都以选择律师为主要就业出路,约10%强的法律毕业生进入司法体系或选择其他公职。要获得美国律师协会的认可,法学院必须达到该协会规定的标准,包括学校设施、图书馆藏书、师生比例、课程安排等。纽约有全美法学院排名第四和第五的名校哥伦比亚大学…     

方法与目标:基本权利民法适用的两种考虑

基本权利既是主观权利,又是客观规范,具有第三人效力。将基本权利适用于民法,目的在于通过民法保护尚未被民法确立的基本权利。此种保护方法为"基本权利第三人间接效力说"。基本权利规范不宜直接作为民事判决依据,宜透过公序良俗、一般人格权等概括条款间接作为民事判决的说理依据。而通过民法保护并可作为民事裁判说理依据的基本权利有平等权、自由权、人格权及部分社会性基本权利。     

纠纷解决:一种新的刑事诉讼目的观

现行刑事诉讼架构中广泛存在的与纠纷解决相关的制度与实践对传统的刑事诉讼双重目的论构成了挑战.回应挑战的途径是将纠纷解决提升为刑事诉讼目的.纠纷解决作为刑事诉讼目的的理论基础存在于现行刑事诉讼中"加害人/被害人"的结构性主线和纠纷解决作为刑事诉讼目的对所有刑事诉讼利益相关者处境的改善之中.在刑事诉讼目的体系中,纠纷解决应当通过正当程序予以实现,并原则上以查明事实真相为基础.     

利益法学立场下刑法目的解释的适用

面对刑法规范供给的不足,刑法解释需要重视利益分析及其基础上的目的解释方法.刑法解释不是认知教义学上的理解,而是表达意义上的论证,利益法学与目的解释之间具有学术上的内在关联,后者是前者在解释论上的延伸.目的解释的内在危险不在目的解释本身,而在解释者解释的过程缺乏利益判断的类型化思维.利益法学立场下的刑法目的解释适用需要妥善处理案件事实对刑法规范的型构意义,目的解释与国民预测可能性的关系以及利益类型化的判断.强调利益分析接受构成要件类型化的限定,是目的解释应当坚持的基本准则.