行政比例与合理性原则的比较研究

尽管比例原则和合理性原则都是控约行政裁量权的理论,但二者有着极大的不同:在内涵方面,比例原则着眼于法益的均衡,合理性原则则凸显对公共利益的喜好;在作为法律渊源的目的方面,比例原则以维护和发展公民权以为最终归宿,合理性原则以公共利益本位为出发点;在适用范围和位阶方面,比例原则较合理性原则的适用范围更广、位阶更高。     

Predicting Proportionality: The Case for Algorithmic Sentencing

A basic principle in sentencing offenders is proportionality. However, proportionality judgments are often left to the discretion of the judge, raising familiar concerns of arbitrariness and bias. This paper considers the case for systematizing judgments of proportionality in sentencing by means of an algorithm. The aim of such an algorithm would be to predict what a judge in that jurisdiction would regard as a proportionate sentence in a particular case. A predictive algorithm of this kind would not necessarily undermine justice in individual cases, is consistent with a particularistic account of moral judgment, and is attractive even in the face of uncertainty as to the legitimate purposes of punishment.     

The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation & Proportionality: A Public Law Principle Adopted into the Private Law of Employment

This article examines the possible adoption of the public law principles of ‘legitimate expectation’ and the standard of ‘proportionality’ as the appropriate and cohesive legal approach to voluntary promises that are normally found in ostensibly non-contractual documents. The article argues that, allowing a further development into the principle of legitimate expectation, which has already been adopted in employment relations as a further development of the implied duty of trust and confidence, could enhance the courts’ approach to the issue of voluntary promises and avoid the unsatisfactory contractual solution that appears to produce inconsistent results. Giving particular consideration to the courts’ application of the proportionality test, thereby recognises an employee’s hierarchy of interests, when seeking to justify an employer’s decision, this article assesses how the influence of the proportionality standard can, and should, offer a more satisfactory solution when applied to resolving disputes.     

Beyond Multilingualism: On Different Approaches to the Handling of Diverging Language Versions of a Community Law

This article deals with a problem created by the EU's multilingualism, the fallibility of translators and the ruses of politicians: for different reasons, it is quite common that equally authentic language versions of a Community law have different meanings if taken on their own. While the ECJ's uniform interpretation approach to this problem, which must be seen as required under the non-discrimination principle, has permitted equitable results in those cases decided by the ECJ, it would not be adequate for the simplest type of case, ie that a citizen has every reason to trust her own language version of a law. In such a case, her legitimate expectations in the equal authenticity of that version requires protection. De lege lata the article therefore proposes, in the interest of generally equitable solutions, a balancing, in the individual case, of the protection of legitimate expectations and the non-discrimination principle. De lege ferenda it proposes a more radical solution, ie that there be only one authentic version of every Community law.     

A Development of Modest Proportions: The Application of the Principle of Proportionality in the Targeted Killings Case

The comment critically discusses the application of the principleof proportionality by the Israeli Supreme Court in the TargetedKillings case. While the judgment confirms the customary statusof the principle and its applicability to all Israel DefenseForces (IDF) military operations during armed conflicts, itssubstantive contents remain, as might have been expected, unclear.In particular, the application of the ‘least-injuriousalternative’ subtest with regard to all civilians takinga direct part in hostilities is unsubstantiated and perhapstoo sweeping. However, the reference by the Court to ex anteand ex post review mechanisms to monitor the application ofthe proportionality principle constitutes a positive contributionto its development under international humanitarian law, whichmight also have some implications for criminal prosecutionsof soldiers and commanders involved in unlawful targeted killingoperations.     

论中国外商投资法的发展趋势——中国改革开放30年外商投资法律制度的回顾和展望

在对外开放的30年中，外商投资企业作为利用外商直接投资的主要形式，中国已经积累了丰富的经验。与此同时，中国外商投资企业法律制度也随之得以产生和发展，并在世界贸易组织规则的框架下得到了进一步的完善。在中国加入世界贸易组织、实行社会主义市场经济的今天，改革当初以企业立法形式确立的外商投资企业法已不能完全适应中国当前改革开放和世界经济一体化进程的需要。在世界贸易组织的“国民待遇”原则下，中国外商投资企业法必然地会从目前实行的“双轨制”企业立法阶段发展到国家宏观调控立法阶段的外商投资法典制阶段，从而使外商投资者和中国国内的各市场经济主体一样，在中国享有真正法律意义上的国民待遇。     

公平与公正待遇标准:国际投资法中的“帝王条款”?

在国际投资仲裁实践中,公平与公正待遇标准得到了最广泛的运用,并显现了极度扩张解释之势;同时,一些西方学者也将之与民商法中的诚实信用原则相提并论,实际上是尊奉该待遇标准为国际投资法中的"帝王条款"。但倘若如此,不仅将严重损害东道国管理外资的主权,而且,法理上也存在诸多疑点。公平与公正待遇标准对于国际投资条约的具体规定,并无"帝王条款"意义上的补缺、修正及解释之功能;同时,该标准应是"国家造法",而非"法官造法"的产物,其与"帝王条款"的实质也不相符。我国应转而支持以国际习惯法的具体规则来诠解该项外资待遇的内容。     

论ICSID仲裁庭对公平公正待遇标准的发展——兼评AES Summit、AES-Tisza诉Hungary案

近年来,国际投资争端中的公平公正待遇标准在ICSID仲裁庭的实践中有了一定的发展。文章首先按时间顺序分阶段梳理该仲裁庭对公平公正待遇标准的界定,随后结合最新的裁决实践,评价公平公正待遇标准要素的发展现状。在此基础上,试图寻找仲裁庭对公平公正待遇标准要素的发展特征。在把握公平公正待遇标准内涵发展趋势的前提下,我们应积极思考并研究我国及投资者的相应对策。     

An Eye for an Eye: Proportionality as a Moral Principle of Punishment

The lex talionis of the Old Testament has been widely perceived—understandably,but mistakenly—as a barbaric law of retribution in kind.It is better understood as a seminal expression of restraintand proportionality as moral principles of punishment. Thishas been recognized from the earliest times. Over the interveningcenturies, the lex talionis has lost neither its moral significancenor its penal relevance. This is reflected in H.L.A. Hart'ssynthesis of modern retributivist and utilitarian theories ofpunishment and, again, in contemporary Canadian law throughthe recognition of proportionality as the fundamental principleof sentencing under the Criminal Code. The tension between thisfundamental principle and Canada's increasing resort to mandatoryminimum sentences of imprisonment is examined briefly in thislight.     

比例原则在公平竞争审查例外制度运行中的适用

公平竞争审查例外制度的具体实施离不开相应的法律原则作为指引,其中最为关键也最为重要的当属比例原则。在比例原则的基本内容架构方面,有必要在传统“三阶理论”之中导入新的子原则——“目的正当性原则”,借以确立起“四阶理论”。在公平竞争审查例外制度运行过程中,引入比例原则事实上不仅具有必要性,而且也具有相应的合理性。比例原则在...     

比例原则的中国宪法依据新释

比例原则已被全球法治实践反复证明属于人权保障的利剑,必将成为中国合宪性审查的基本标准。为了更好地推进合宪性审查,并消除对比例原则适用范围与功能的误解,有必要探寻比例原则在中国的宪法依据。通过解释我国《宪法》中“权利义务一致性”“基本权利”“人格尊严”“法治国”“征收征用”等条款的尝试,均不能很好或完全地推导出比例原则。比例原则的本质在于调整权力与权利、权利与权利之间的关系,其功能在于合理确定国家权力与公民权利的界限。比例原则内置于权利和权力之中。通过解释我国《宪法》第51条的“权利的限度”条款和第33条第3款的“国家尊重和保障人权”条款,可以得出比例原则在中国具有宪法依据,属于宪法基本原则。     

论PE“对赌协议”的法律规制

PE"对赌协议"作为一种新兴的、有利于我国经济发展的投融资方式对于投融资双方都有着非常重要的价值和意义。我国尚缺乏对PE"对赌协议"进行界定、调整和监督的明文法律规定。最高人民法院在海富投资案中对相关问题的裁判也还有值得商榷之处,所以,结合PE"对赌协议"的特性和特征进行有针对性的法律调整和监管势在必行。而且,对于"对赌协议"中的补偿标准,只要是不超过PE投资方的非股权投资款本金的补偿都是公平合理并可以接受的;而对于"对赌协议"中的有限免责条款,除可以由投融资双方在协议中加以约定外,相关的法律法规还可以设定一种浮动比例的计算公式,或是为融资方在免责情况下所应补偿的金额设定一个合理的范围。     

Principle of Proportionality as Principle of Economic Efficiency

The principle of proportionality is at the cornerstone of EU law, and precisely of the case‐law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). In the law and economics literature, the general principles of law are commonly opposed to legal rules in terms of efficiency. On the one hand, the legal formalistic approach consists of apprehending the law as principled, whereby principles of law do not and should not encompass an efficiency rationale and should be self‐sufficient. On the other hand, the legal nihilism denying the existence or relevance of the general principles of law favours legal rules that are said to incorporate an efficiency rationale. I intend to analyse the efficiency rationale of probably the most important general principles of EU law—the proportionality principle. In this paper, I shall assert that not only does the EU proportionality principle encapsulate an efficiency rationale, but most importantly, it has been interpreted by the ECJ as such—hence, I propose the representation of the principle of proportionality as a principle of economic efficiency. After having introduced the principle of proportionality (1), I shall decipher the proportionality principle both from a law and economics perspective, and from a comparative perspective (2). Then, I shall delve into the jurisprudence of the ECJ so that the judicial reasoning of the Court as this reasoning proves the relevance of the proposed representation (3). Finally, I conclude in light of the findings of this paper (4).     

WTO下行政补贴的原则探究

WTO下的行政补贴原则应在行政法基本原则的框架下 ,充分吸收WTO基本原则的有关内容 ,并纳入《SCM协定》的有关规定 ,以使其内容具体明确。据此 ,应包括平等原则、比例原则、公开原则、国家辅助作用原则。平等原则着眼于对竞争者公平竞争权的保障 ;比例原则着眼于补贴措施与公益目的之间的均衡 ;补贴公开原则着眼于对行政主体在补贴领域裁量权的程序限制 ;国家辅助作用原则着眼于控制补贴行为的范围和程度     

The EOS Engineering Corporation Case and the Nemo Debet Bis Vexari Pro Una et Eadem Causa Principle in China

Nemo Debet Bis Vexari Pro Una et Eadem Causa is a general principleof civil procedure applied domestically in China. Foreign judgmentsare not regarded as res judicata unless an applicable internationaltreaty requires otherwise. The ruling in the EOS case by theSupreme People's Court in 2003 clarified to some extent theelements that should be considered when applying this principle.     

建构中国的警察比例原则

作为国家权力之重要组成部分,警察权的法治化运作乃公民基本权利之最有力保障,然而公民基本权利也面临来自警察权滥用的威胁。被誉为西方国家公法领域之“帝王条款”的比例原则起源于德国警察法,蕴涵着丰富的控权思想,对警察权的运作具有极强的监督与控制功能,并为实现行政目的与保障人权之间的平衡和防止警察自由裁量权的滥用提供了可操作的标准。因此,为保障人权,弘扬法治,应尽快确立我国的警察比例原则,从而实现对警察权的有效规制。     

An Intentionally Unfair Trial

Numerous flaws made the Dujail trial a violation of the internationallyprotected human right to a fair trial. The United States andthe Iraqi authorities conducted an unfair trial knowing thatboth the Third and Fourth Geneva Convention describe ‘wilfullydepriving’ a person ‘of the rights of fair and regulartrial’ as a war crime. Even if Saddam Hussein was notto be regarded as a prisoner of war, that is, merely as a civilian,in any case his right to fair trial was protected by internationallaw. According to the author, both the relevant states and theindividuals involved in the unfair Dujail trial bear responsibilityfor breaches of international law.     

行政法比例原则的价值分析

比例原则的基本内涵和价值理念是行政法基本原则领域值得关注和探讨的重要问题之一。在内涵方面,比例原则包括适当性原则、必要性原则和比例性原则;在价值理念上它符合宪政和法治的思想,可以规范行政主体的自由裁量权、保证相对人权益的最大化,而且能够降低行政成本,提高行政效率。随着比例原则的不断发展和在世界各国的广泛应用,其在我国行政法中也将起到重要的作用。     

Towards the End and Beyond: The "Almost" Referral of Bagaragaza in Light of the Completion Strategy of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

The Bagaragaza case was the first at the International CriminalTribunal for Rwanda in which the referral of an accused to anational jurisdiction was discussed. Such a referral may bemade at the discretion of a Trial Chamber designated by thePresident, if the Chamber satisfied itself that the Accusedwill have a fair trial and that the death penalty will not beimposed or carried out. The referral can be made to three differentStates: the one where the accused was arrested, the one werethe crimes were committed and the one which has jurisdictionand is willing and adequately prepared to hear the case. Inthe Bagaragaza case, the request for referral was dismissed,because the Referral State in question, the Kingdom of Norway,has no provision for genocide in its penal law. This paper discussesthe referral mechanism and the role it plays in the Tribunal'sambitious completion strategy. An analysis of the Bagaragazacase will show how this mechanism has actually been applied,concluding that the Tribunal rightly resisted the pressure toabide by the completion strategy and chose substance over form.After the Tribunal's closure, two important questions will facethe international community: (a) Where will convicted and acquittedpersons be relocated? (b) Has international criminal justicebeen promoted at the expense of long-term peace and stability?     

Economic crises, capital transfer restrictions and investor protection under modern investment treaties

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. Key points

• Capital liberalization was the norm of internationaleconomic relations until the Economic Depression of the 1930swhen exchange restrictions became an important instrument ofeconomic policy of many countries.
• The IMF Articles of Agreementwere the outcome of efforts by several countries to providean acceptable international legal framework that would minimizethe negative impact of exchange restrictions while at the sametime preserving the right of Member States to impose exchangerestrictions when faced with balance-of-payment problems.
• Thatposition is to a large extent maintained by most modern investmenttreaties although subject to heightened scrutiny by internationalarbitral tribunals under the disciplines of expropriation, nationaltreatment and fair and equitable treatment standards among othersin order to protect investors’ interests whilst safeguardinghost states, regulatory autonomy.