对抗秘密取证:对质权属性及范围重述

就对质权的理论定位而言,学界一直莫衷一是:有功利主义视角下的工具论,亦有自由主义视角下的权利论,还有混合了两种主义的有限权利论。对于对质权应该坚持较为宽泛意义上的权利论,其首先应作为一项权利而存在,其次才是追求其他价值,例如发现真实。进而,对质权之于当事人应侧重程序性而非实体性保障。相应地,对质权的调整范围也应当作广义解释,即可以调整全部庭外陈述。当然,调整范围上的平等对待,并不意味着调整程度上的一视同仁。对质权的核心在于防止追诉方滥权,因此对属于证词性陈述(testimonial statements)应当由最为严厉的对质规则调整。对于非证词性庭外陈述,检察官可以在满足证人“无法寻获”的前提下,引入未经对质但可采的庭外陈述。     

Down the Funnel

This article argues that the new legitimacy of the Russian regime has a military-mobilization character; in order to maintain it the regime needs a deeper confrontation with the West and a dismantling of the residual elements of the electoral legitimacy. This shift also requires stronger reliance on the use of force.     

Managing Victim Confrontation: Auto Theft and Informal Sanction Threats

Objectives. This paper explores how offenders manage the prospect of victim confrontation during auto theft. Methods. Data were drawn from in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 35 active offenders recruited from the streets of a large Midwestern US city using snowball sampling methods. Results. Two contextual domains figured prominently in the offenders’ decision-making calculus: The area around the target and the target itself. The first galvanized the offenders’ attention to, and management of, informal social control. The second enjoined offenders to balance speed and stealth in breaching the target. Conclusions. Victim confrontation is an informal sanction that is distinct from both retaliation and traditional extralegal sanctions. The rarity with which it occurs in auto theft is likely due to confrontation avoidance measures offenders adopt at the front end of the offense and during the enactment process itself. The conceptual implications of victim confrontation in crime are explored in relation to the following five areas: (1) sanction celerity and present orientation; (2) sanction certainty and ambiguity aversion; (3) sanction interdependence; (4) violence avoidance; and (5) directions for future research.     

Assumptions of gain preference and choice of action by states in international legislation: From the perspective of international relations

Upon entry into the vision of scholars in international relations, game theory has quickly become an effective approach to analyzing international conflicts and cooperation, and has been broadly adopted by neo-realism and neo-liberalism, which are two dominating aspects in the current theories of international relations. The former argues that the states participating in the game always follow relative gains, hence achieving a pessimistic conclusion on international cooperation, while the latter argues that the states participating in the game always follow absolute gains and deduce an optimistic prospect for international cooperation, which provides a useful way to analyze the confrontation and cooperation of states in international legislative game. Of course, it is aware that gain preference and choice of action by states in international legislative game are also conditioned by other factors.     

Confronting Religion: Veiled Witnesses,the Right to a Fair Trial and the Supreme Court of Canada's Judgment in R v N.S.

The Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R v N.S. is significant because the majority seems to endorse an understanding of confrontation that assumes a defendant's right to a fair trial is imperilled by a witness who seeks to give evidence while wearing the niqab. The case is of interest because it permits reflection upon the interrelationship between the right to a fair trial and the right to confront witnesses enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Given that the European Court of Human Rights conceptualises confrontation in epistemic terms, it is argued that it would be unlikely to find that a conviction based upon evidence from a niqab‐wearing witness would infringe the right to a fair trial. This note examines the value of demeanour evidence and whether the majority in R v N.S. was correct that the abrogation of the ability to assess demeanour evidence necessarily undermines trial fairness.     

The “Trump Factor” and the Changing Face of Globalization

The victory of Donald Trump’s administration not only meant a change in domestic socioeconomic policy, but also in the sphere of U.S. foreign ties; it has had a strong influence on the development trend of the world economy and trade. Taking the path of protectionism and confrontation with key trade and economic partners in Latin America, Asia, and Europe, Washington has attempted to break the status quo and transform the existing character of the globalization process. The “Trump factor” has become a key element in the formation of a new global order.     

VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE AND REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT

Enforcement strategies that encourage "voluntary compliance" can improve regulatory efficiency by reducing unnecessary enforcement and compliance costs associated with legal confrontation between firms and agencies. This article analyzes the enforcement dilemma that causes confrontation and describes a "Tit for Tat" strategy capable of increasing socially beneficial cooperation. The strategy requires agencies to be reasonable toward cooperative firms, vengeful toward cheaters, unrelenting in pursuit of chronic evaders, but conciliatory toward repentant firms. Reforms in this neglected and poorly understood part of the regulatory process could yield considerable social benefits.     

论家庭身份的私法人格底蕴及其历史演变

随着家庭在氏族社会内部的出现,家庭身份便与氏族成员身份相互对峙,呈现出其最初的＂私法人格＂属性。在古代罗马国家,私法人格与家庭身份相互融合性;公法人格与私法人格之间的关系,本质为国家公权与家长权的动态对峙。及至近、现代社会,随着理性哲学的兴起,以及私人领域＂社会＂与＂家庭＂的分化,由于公法人格与私法中的社会人格具有共同的理性基础,在民法中被冠以＂人格＂的称谓;而私法中的家庭人格则因其妥协、包容的特性,掩盖了法律人格的理性基础,被民法从＂人格＂的概念中剔除,＂人＂、＂身＂两立的格局从而形成。相应的,人格与家庭身份遂成为近、现代私法领域人之存在的两种截然不同的状态。     

传闻证据规则的功能性分析

要避免制度研究陷入边陲化陷阱,就需要对其作相应的功能性分析。传闻证据规则具有保证证据可信性与被告人质证权的功能,同时还具有维持对抗制诉讼的隐性功能。另外还具有牺牲诉讼效率和放纵罪犯的潜在负功能。在基本层面上,传闻证据规则是基于对抗制诉讼模式与陪审团制度的需求而产生的;在根本层面上,是基于受基督教文化影响的社会控制系统的需求而产生的。发挥传闻证据规则的功能,需要庭前证据开示制度与发达的法律援助制度等保障性条件。从总体上看,我国具有建立传闻证据规则的需求性,但缺乏传闻证据规则功能发挥的保障性条件。而且,在目前制度条件下建立传闻证据规则,可能导致调查取证更加困难。     

知识产权变动登记效力模式探析——以专利权为例

专利权作为绝对权,在变动过程中关涉不特定多数人利益,因此其在变动中的公示方式及其效力模式的选择至关重要。通过分析,在我国现行法律体系下,专利权变动宜采登记证明主义和登记生效主义,但在应然层面上,或许采登记证明主义和登记对抗主义更为合适。专利权变动登记模式可以适用于整个知识产权。     

Grounding the Rule of Law

Abstract. Although the concept of Rule of Law has been revived and developed vigorously by mid-twentieth century conservative political theorists, contemporary legal positivists have not been impressed. The author reviews this confrontation, outlines the logic for a strong theory of Rule of Law, and surveys the leading attempts to provide compelling grounds for such a theory.     

证据法的基本权利保障取向

证据法的理性主义传统,既要求通过理性证明的方式去查明事实真相,而非诉诸神明和暴力;又不以追求真相为最高目的,而是将其视为实现正义的手段.这种理性传统,决定了法治国家证据制度具有求真、求善的双重功能,并将公正奉为首要价值,从而奠定了基本权利保障的价值取向.我国证据法学研究和证据制度建设正在经历从义务本位向权利本位转型,权...     

The Objectivity of Beliefs,Reasonable Disagreement and Political Deliberation

This paper is part of a broader argument that seeks to offer a justification for political authority. It aims to investigate the role of truth in political argument and to place the problem of reasonable disagreement. The argument focuses on the possibility of political deliberation, that figures as a stage of political decision‐making. It has to do with a confrontation between incompatible substantive beliefs which, however, all seem to be reasonable. How can citizens holding incompatible beliefs engage in an enterprise of justifying them to one another? That is the question.     

Hearsay and Human Rights: Al‐Khawaja in the Grand Chamber

This note analyses the European Court of Human Rights' Grand Chamber judgment in Al‐Khawaja and Tahery v United Kingdom, and gives it a cautious welcome. The note suggests how English Courts might respond to the judgment and concludes by assessing justifications for strong confrontation rights and the wider political context of the Grand Chamber's decision.     

印证与自由心证--我国刑事诉讼证明模式

我国刑事诉讼通行“印证证明模式”,将获得印证性直接支持证据视为证明的关键;注重证明的“外部性”而不注重“内省性”。采取印证证明模式的主要原因包括非直接和非言词的审理方式、审理与判定的分离、重复的事实审理需要案件在书面上的可检验性与印证性等。同时,该模式与法官的素质以及占主导地位的认识论有一定的关系。印证证明模式具有易把握与可检验的优点,但刑事司法的现实环境常常使印证要求无法达到。在我国,应当谨慎而适度地借鉴典型的自由心证证明方式,以适应刑事司法的现实需要。     

OUT-OF-COURT STATEMENTS BY VICTIMS OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE TO MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMS: A CONFRONTATION CLAUSE ANALYSIS

Acknowledging the rapid growth of child sexual abuse in the United States, this Note advocates for the recognition of a limited exception to the blanket-hearsay ban on out-of-court statements made by unavailable declarants set out by the Supreme Court in Crawford v. Washington . In order to protect a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation right, Crawford requires that hearsay evidence that is "testimonial" in nature be deemed inadmissible if the witness is unavailable and the defendant does not have a prior opportunity to cross-examine the witness against him. However, Crawford noted that, where nontestimonial hearsay is at issue, cross-examination may not be necessary. Accordingly, where a child sexual abuse victim makes statements during a structured or semi-structured forensic interview to a member of a multidisciplinary team, these statements should be deemed nontestimonial and thus admitted into evidence, without requiring cross-examination of the child. Allowing for this exception to the general hearsay ban in Crawford is not only consistent with current precedent, but it is also warranted to promote public policy and to curb the negative impact such abuse has on society.     

A Court as the Process of Signification: Legal Semiotics of the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons in 1996 was a landmark case because, for the first time in history, the legal aspect of nuclear weapons was addressed. The decision has evoked controversies regarding the Court’s conclusion, the legal status of international humanitarian law in relation to nuclear weapons, and a newly introduced concept of state survival. While much legal scholarship discusses and criticizes the legal significance of the opinion, there has not been enough scholarship examining the Court’s specific choice of words and concepts that sustain its wider ideological and political position in the opinion. The paper argues that the Court’s vague and controversial logic is attributed to its confrontation with two international orders/codes: the legal order (or international law) and the political order (or state practice). The paper engages in legal semiotics as methodology to decode legal text and discover a deep structure that sustains networks of codes, according to which text is interpreted. Through the semiotic examination of three sets of key concepts (1) “permitted” and “prohibited,” (2) “threat of use” and “possession of the weapon,” and (3) “state survival,” the paper shows the ICJ’s confrontation with two orders/codes and eventual prioritization of the political order over the international legal order. The analysis of the opinion based on legal semiotics indicates an intimate and inseparable relationship between state practice and international law, which must be disentangled for the sake of the rule of law.     

中华民国矿场安全与健康立法的价值

民国时期,工业发展和长期战争急需矿产品而加速了矿业开发。但矿工的福利与迅速发展的矿业不协调,导致劳资双方对立。为此,国民政府制订了一系列改善矿工福利的法律法规,其中以《矿场法》最突出。该法是一部以健康安全优先、界定矿主责任、保障矿工权利、强制培训矿工的矿场安全与健康法。其立法目的、指导思想和基本原则很值得我们今天继承。     

论犯罪事实的性质

在刑事诉讼过程中,司法机关最终确认的犯罪事实是一种什么性质的事实,主要存在着客观真实说与法律真实说的竞争。客观真实说与法律真实说的对抗并非两种刑事诉讼证明标准之间的对抗,而是对刑事司法程序中确认的认识论犯罪事实的两种不同定性。法律真实说之所以更为恰当,是因为法律真实说尊重现实,可以为认识论犯罪事实的可谬性找到逻辑上的根据,有利于程序优先司法理念的确定,并且符合司法特质。     

南非宪法法院的"合理性审查标准"介评

"合理性审查标准"是南非宪法法院对政府积极义务进行审查的主要标准,是在宪法法院的判例中形成并逐渐发展起来的。"合理性审查标准"的采用,使宪法法院可以在不侵入立法和行政功能、不与政治部门发生直接冲突的情况下,实现对社会权一定程度的保护。但是,宪法法院对"合理性"的过分关注也制约了法院对政府积极义务审查的范围和程度,对社会权的保护产生了一些不利影响。