The Holocaust Through Latvia's Eyes: How the Nazi Party Became the Lesser of Two Evils

Internationalization of exhibitions creates cost structure distortion. What costs are being reduced thanks to international collaboration in the museum field? To determine the profitability of the model, international strategies are analyzed with two exhibitions—“Matisse, Cézanne, Picasso…the Stein Adventure,” coproduced by the Réunion des Musées Nationaux–Grand Palais organization, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, and the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and “Masterpieces from the Musée National Picasso, Paris,” exhibited in major museums such as Centro de Arte Reina Sofia in Madrid, the Hermitage in Saint Petersburg, or the Seattle Museum of Art.     

Moral Foundations,Intuitions of Justice,and the Intricacies of Punitive Sentiment

Research on punitive attitudes has, so far, focused largely on people's retributive attitudes toward offenders. However, a large theoretical body of research indicates that concerns about different types of offenses and victims may be just as important in structuring punitive attitudes. Particularly, Moral Foundations Theory suggests that distinct punitive attitudes may be based in intuitive moral concerns (“moral foundations”) about offenses that victimize individuals, groups, and the “divine,” referring to bodily purity or sanctity. In this study, I develop measures of what I term “victim‐centered punitiveness,” and use data from a nationwide survey of adult Americans (N = 915) to compare the sources of offender‐ and victim‐centered punitiveness. As expected, different moral foundations shape offender‐ and victim‐centered punitiveness in different ways, suggesting that they have distinct intuitive, moral bases. Other factors, including racial resentment, also have distinct effects on each type of punitiveness.     

反倾销法上从低征税规则的适用

在欧盟等适用从低征税规则的WTO成员方，反倾销税并非一律根据倾销幅度确定，而是根据倾销幅度和损害幅度中的低者确定。从低征税规则具有合理性，不仅为越来越多的成员方所适用，而且在WTO多哈回合谈判中得到了绝大多数成员方的支持。从低征税规则适用的关键在于损害幅度的计算。作为欧盟计算损害幅度的两种基本方法，削价法和低价法在实践中得到了广泛的应用，对其他成员方具有重大的影响。中国应该在反倾销中适用从低征税规则，并借鉴欧盟的削价法和低价法。     

Unveiling the Intricacies of Bullying: Students’ Perspectives in a Polytechnic in Singapore

This study attempts to understand bullying as a process in a polytechnic in Singapore. Bullying begins in the presence of the various contexts for it to take place. These contexts serve as the basis for the reasons and actions behind the bullying process. These contexts may be related to race, nationality, gender, academic ability, age, physical appearance and mannerism. With these contexts in place, the aims of the bullying process are articulated. The aims of bullying include manipulation, entertainment, reprisal and exclusion. Anchoring on the aims of bullying, a typology of bullies is suggested (Manipulating, Entertaining, Reprising and Excluding). The difference in the intentions of the bullying dictates the types of bullying tactics used by the bullies on their victims. These bullying tactics include discriminatory body language; mimicking; discriminatory joking; mocking; intentional isolation; and rumour mongering. Typologies of tutor bystanders (Apathetic, Focussed and Intervening) and student bystanders (Reassured, Guilty, Collaborating and Hindering) are formed in this study. Eventually the consequences of the bullying would determine the type of responses elicited from the victims. In turn, the types of responses by the victims would create a typology of victims in a bullying episode (Indifferent, Resigned and Proactive). Overall, a process of bullying in the context of the case polytechnic is described in this paper and it has implications for the development of theory, practice and future research in the area of bullying in the context of tertiary level education.     

Choice of Evils: In Search of a Viable Rationale

The defense of necessity, also known as the ??choice of evils,?? reflects popular moral intuitions and common sense: sometimes, breaking the rules is the right??indeed, the only??thing to do in order to avoid a greater evil. Citing a classic example, mountain climbers may break into a cabin to wait out a deadly snow storm and appropriate the owner??s provisions because their property violations are a lesser evil compared to the loss of life. At the same time, this defense contradicts the fundamental principles of criminal responsibility in that it authorizes violation of rights of innocent bystanders. By allowing the mountain climbers to override the property rights of the cabin owner, the defense effectively forbids the cabin owner to use force in response??a different rule would perpetuate violence. This outcome is at odds with the basic criminal law doctrines. There is no general duty to rescue in Anglo-American law. Yet, by forbidding the cabin owner to use force, the defense of necessity essentially imposes on him the duty to forego his interests in favor of those of the mountain climbers. The paper explores the origins and boundaries of the defense of necessity. It argues that the existing public and private theories of necessity are unsatisfactory and concludes that a viable theory of necessity should be able to explain why it is sometimes permissible to override individual rights of citizens without their consent or fault.     

建立刑事辩护准入制度实现刑事辩护专业化——兼与张青松律师商榷

一、问题的提出 从比较法考察的视角，辩护权是一项被普遍承认的权利。尽管世界各国的政治体制、社会制度、意识形态、文化传统不同，但是，被指控人有权获得辩护却是公认的法律原则，并且得到国际社会的高度认同。从历史考察的视角，在固属自然权利之辩护权中，律师辩护权是一项能将被指控人的辩护权真正还原为一种现实权利的派生权利，所以，“刑事诉讼的历史就是扩大辩护权的历史”。     

建立刑事辩护准人制度提高刑事辩护质量——“中国刑事辩护30年暨刑事辩护准入材度”国际研讨会综述

2008年11月1日-2日,由中国社会科学院法学所、国际司法桥梁与中国行为法学会律师执业行为研究会共同主办的“中国刑事辩护30年暨刑事辩护准入制度”国际研讨会在北京昆泰大酒店成功举办。来自全国人大内务司法委员会、法律工作委员会、最高人民法院、最高人民检察院、公安部、司法部、全国律师协会、北京市律师协会以及山东、四川、陕西、河北等公、检、法、司、律师事务所和法律援助中心的实务界人士,专家70余人参加了此次会议的研讨。     

论“唯庭审主义”之辩护模式

在中国的刑事辩护实践中,始终存在一种唯庭审主义的辩护模式。其主要特征是,律师把庭审环节当成辩护的主要场域,甚至唯一场域,而忽视庭审外尤其是庭审前的辩护活动。审前既不与检警机关设法沟通,也未能说服其作出任何有利于己方的决定;庭审辩护又以宣读根据卷宗撰写的辩护词为中心。这一模式的形成,与审前制度空间的局限、刑事辩护理念的偏差、审前辩护技能的欠缺有着紧密的关系,并导致了诸多消极的后果,尤其是辩护效果不佳,无法有效保障被追诉人的利益,也难以及时地促使检警机关自我纠偏。2012年刑事诉讼法赋予了律师在审前程序的辩护人地位,使得部分律师日益重视辩护前移,并取得了初步成效。但要让中国律师彻底走出唯庭审主义的辩护模式,实现有效辩护尤其是有效果的辩护,至少还应从检察机关的审前定位和办案方式的诉讼化、律师权利的增设与保障、刑事法律援助的质量监管和值班律师的定位等诸多方面,对中国刑事辩护制度乃至刑事司法制度加以改革和完善。     

关于律师辩护的调查报告——以监狱服刑人员为调查对象

律师辩护是程序正义在刑事诉讼制度上的重要体现。律师辩护不仅在实体上有助于保障被指控人受到的法律评价是正义的,而且有助于保障被指控人的程序性人权得到必要的尊重。关于我国律师辩护的制度实践及程序性人权保障的具体状况一直缺乏相应的数据支持,也难以进行比较准确的定量分析。就此针对监狱服刑人员的调查有助干立法者了解刑事诉讼中被指控人的真正程序待遇和制度需求,为刑事辩护制度进一步改革提供实质帮助。     

In Defense of the Practice Theory

Hart proposed that law is made possible by the practice among legal officials of observing conventional social rules, the most important being rules of recognition. This view has been dubbed the practice theory, and it has been attacked by many legal theorists. This paper argues that many criticisms of the practice theory fail because they misunderstand the nature of the organizational challenge to which rules of recognition are the solution. The challenge of constituting a legal system is essentially the challenge of constituting a group agent, and when viewed through Pettit’s account of group agency, the practice theory can easily be defended.     

论逆防卫——关于正当防卫制度的刑法学及犯罪学思考

随着刑法第20条第3款的颁布,刑法的中立立场日趋动摇,更有护短之嫌,特别是第2款对防卫过当行为规制不力,加之第3款对防卫权的张扬,犯罪人的合法权益被尘封乃至在立法、司法中漠视,这种对法意的误读不仅给犯罪人带来切肤之痛,也亵渎了刑法的权威.在崇尚人权的时代,我们的刑法再也不能视若无睹了.本文对刑法的正当防卫制度进行解读和重构,提出逆防卫理论以确保犯罪人合法权益.     

多哈回合反倾销谈判中的从低征税规则研究

现行的从低征税规则不具有强制性,在多哈回合中成为反倾销谈判的焦点。无论是从法律上还是经济上,从低征税规则都具有合理性,《反倾销协定》中理应引入强制性的从低征税规则。尽管强制性的从低征税规则受到大部分成员方的支持,但由于受到美国的质疑,因此在《反倾销协定》中引入该规则困难重重。中国在反倾销谈判中应调整现行立场,支持强制性的从低征税规则。     

论辩护性证明理论的建构

辩护性证明是指在刑事诉讼中被告人及其辩护人提供证据证实其辩护性主张成立的诉讼活动。学界对被告人证明责任问题已有论及,对辩护性证明对象及其证明标准却鲜有研究,对辩护证明理论的全面研究更是寥寥无几。辩护性证明责任、辩护性证明对象以及证明标准等是辩护性证明理论中重要的基础性问题,它们是建构我国辩护性证明理论的重要组成部分。     

审前程序中的律师辩护权

被指控人的辩护权是一项贯穿刑事诉讼始终的诉讼权利 ,律师作为辩护人协助被指控人行使辩护权。由于审判前程序与审判程序在目的、地位、结构等方面的差异 ,导致审判前程序中的律师辩护与审判程序中的律师辩护相比 ,呈现出辩护权的有限性、辩护的准备性与独立性、辩护功能的受制性、程序性辩护的重要性等特点。加强我国审判前程序中的律师辩护 ,应当在扩充辩护权、纠正审判前程序的具体定位、调整审判前程序的诉讼结构以及完善强制措施制度等方面做出努力     

为职权主义辩护

"职权主义"最早起源于欧陆,最初的含义系查清案件事实的方法,后演变为大陆法系国家普遍的诉讼形态。"职权主义"与"当事人主义"的对立并非历史的产物,而系诉讼法学者的理论创设。"职权主义"的核心内涵也非一成不变,随着时代的发展在不断丰富。当代的"职权主义"可界定为"诉讼以社会利益优先为导向、国家权力为主导、实质真实为目标,审前程序凸显侦检机关的优势侦查权,审判程序凸显法官主导控制权的正当程序模型"。时下学界对"职权主义"存在较大的批评,这主要源于对传统职权主义诉讼的误解以及对当事人主义的理想化。中国因国家权力主导的制度背景、追求客观真实的司法传统以及原有职权主义诉讼的基本构架,既应避免进入"当事人主义"或"对抗制"的陷阱,也不应设立理念混乱、制度杂糅的"混合式诉讼",而应坚持走职权主义的道路。