权利与原则:撩开说话的法律面纱

说话权利的保护程度表征着一个国家的民主、开放和宽容.综观人类在说话方面的权利及其法律原则,我们可以将其归结为:可以说话的权利与事先限制之禁止原则;说真话的权利与真实抗辩原则;说真实谎言的权利与真正的恶意原则;说意见性言论的权利与合理评论原则;不说话的权利与精神自由原则;要求说话的权利与媒体接近原则;用行为说话的权利与背景限制原则.     

Piercing the Legal Veil: Commercial Arbitration and Transnational Law

The contemporary search for new forms of international governance, of which the debate around lex mercatoria is but an example, should attentively build on the lessons on public and private ordering learned in the nation state. Sophisticated commercial practices on a transnational scale, while necessitating adaptive and flexible procedures within an adequate institutional framework, involve many of the same normative questions posed by economic law in the nation state. The following article critically discusses the claims made in the lex mercatoria debate as to the rise of a transnational private law society ('Privatrechtsgesellschaft') in which political problems of exclusion and freedom have allegedly been resolved by the universal spread of private autonomy. Against similar images of a world exclusively made up of independent, self-relying market citizens, it is argued that if a conception of rights is to be rescued from the deathbed of the traditional nation state, then the learning experiences made within its confines are well worth considering in light of the pressing legitimacy needs of emerging institutions and polities.     

法律职业话语的解析

职业主义、精英主义和民粹主义构成了现代社会关于法律职业的三种话语系统和意识形态。职业主义是一种描绘和论证法律职业的理想图景的话语,精英主义是一种论证法律职业的正当性和合法性的话语,而民粹主义则是一种批判法律职业之弊害的话语。三种话语系统和意识形态之间的良性互动,是法律职业健康发展的有效保证。     

比较与选择：秘密侦查的法律监督

秘密侦查包括乔装侦查和秘密监控,存在着行政机关监督、法院监督、检察院监督三种模式.大陆法系国家检察机关在秘密侦查的监督中占据重要地位,英美国家对于乔装侦查没有采用司法审查机制.我国应建立以检察机关为主的秘密侦查法律监督模式,这样符合我国的宪法精神和法律体制,而且检察权的特点更适合对秘密侦查进行监督.     

苏格拉底的选择与法律的信仰——浅析中国普法教育的困境与出路

在柏拉图的对话录《克力同》里,描述了古希腊的伟大哲人苏格拉底誓死不越狱的经历。苏格拉底提出了两个理由说明不应越狱:其一,如果一个人自愿生活在一个国家,并且享受这个国家法律给予的权利,意味着是和国家之间订立了一个契约。享受权利的同时也必须接受法律赋予的义务,在双方契约关系存续的情况下,如果只享有权利而不服从和履行义务,即是毁约,而这在道德上是不被允许的。其二,法律本身也有公正的要求——社会秩序。如果人们动辄以法律规定背离自己的意志和利益为理由,拒绝服从法律义务,甚至否定法律的效力和资格,则社会秩序便会受到威胁…     

我国近30年“依法治税”的理论言说——基于法律话语的分析

改革开放30年以来,"依法治税"在我国税法学以及税收实务界获得了广泛认同。通过法律话语分析可知,"依法治税"是上世纪80年代后期以来在我国形成的独特话语现象,其理论言说的话语主体为政府官员,其言说的内容是使用法律(包括政策)"治"理税收。这样一种自上而下加以推行的"依法治税"模式在改革开放之初具有一定的进步性,但是随着"税收法治"的发展,"依法治税"理论言说开始式微,并且成为阻碍进一步推动税收法治的话语障碍。     

揭开雇主“替代责任”的面纱——兼论《侵权责任法》第34条之解释论基础

我国民法学界和立法机关的主流观点认为,雇主责任的性质是替代责任,这种看法并不合理。替代责任原理及规则渊源于英美普通法,其立基于近代手工业社会,反映了当时较为简单的雇佣关系。到了现代工业风险社会,随着企业规模的扩大和雇佣关系的复杂化,这一原理及规则不能为遭受企业活动侵害的受害人提供充分的法律保护,也不能为雇主积极履行义务提供法律上的激励机制。因此,使用替代责任原理并不能对《侵权责任法》第34条作出合理、妥当的解释。目前,英美法上的"企业责任理论"和德国法上的"组织过错理论"反映了比较法上雇主责任领域的最新发展趋势。     

The Legal Discourse of the Common Law: A Game of Chess

English law, like any otherspecialized topic, needs a particular languagefor its understanding. The legal discourse ofthe common law gathers a set of theoretical andcustomary mechanisms subject to internal orexternal intrusions into its directions foruse. Two ideas are highlighted: the rigidity ofthe overall regulating structure of the law,and the use of `fuzzy sets' to provideflexibility to legal discourse. This unsteadyor fuzzy discourse production proves thislanguage to be the result of a long and complexhistorical process of socialisation. Theseinteractions of reference and of wordinglegitimate a mode of precise and technicalinstitutional stratification, combining bothconstruction and argumentation.     

长江禁捕与退捕渔民补偿的法治因应

长江禁捕行为有其合法性依据。“收回渔民捕捞权”和“专用生产设备报废”乃禁捕政策之核心,对二者的定性直接决定着长江禁捕行为的本质界定。“收回渔民捕捞权”的法律性质应认定为征收。“专用生产设备报废”内涵有收缴和规范管理两个层面,前者为征收,后者应界定为“应给予补偿之准征收”。故此,长江禁捕行为应认定为国家因公共利益的实现而实行的征收行为。依比较法及我国现行法的征收补偿精神,对罹受特别损失的退捕渔民应遵循“生活权补偿”理念。据此理念,现行退捕渔民补偿体系存在逻辑纰缪,具体补偿实践问题丛生。故而,退捕渔民补偿体系应调整为以“收回渔民捕捞权补偿”和“专用生产设备报废补偿”为主体结构。以实质化的转产就业安排、灵活性的临时生活补偿、充分的养老保障因应前者,以尊重退捕渔民意愿并畅通其救济途径的做法对后者予以改进。     

Legal Entrepreneurship and the Strategic Virtues of Legal Uncertainty

The field of law and strategy (LAS) has advanced our understanding of the law's role in competitive advantage. To date, however, LAS has neglected low rule of law environments—countries characterized by expansive degrees of legal uncertainty. LAS should account for these settings, too, since environmental uncertainty is a strategically significant factor for any company. This article situates the strategic relevance of legal uncertainty in the Chinese context and fills an important gap by illustrating how LAS principles apply in low rule of law jurisdictions. Specifically, this article develops the construct of legal entrepreneurship—the notion that attorneys may apply an entrepreneurial mind-set and skill set to position the client favorably and legitimately within the uncertainties of the legal landscape, thereby creating legal competitive advantages for the client. Drawing upon interviews with expert attorneys and executives, this article presents a typology of legal strategies available to U.S. companies in China, uniquely modeling these approaches along the two fundamental dimensions of legal strategy. Additionally, this article identifies two basic types of legal uncertainty in the cross-border context and offers guidelines for the exercise of legal entrepreneurship. Together, these arguments demonstrate that legal entrepreneurship is an empirically viable construct within the LAS project. In low rule of law jurisdictions that have embraced foreign enterprise, legal entrepreneurship will generally optimize the American company's pursuit of both legal value creation and legal risk management.     

制作主权：法权会议与近代法学话语实践

1926年召开的法权会议作为北洋政府一次废除领事裁判权、收回法权的外交努力源于华盛顿会议关于中国治外法权的决议。此次会议虽被国人寄予厚望却未能废除领事裁判权,而只是出具了一份描述中国法律及司法状况的报告书。法权会议报告书指陈中国法典不完善、司法不独立等等,庶几反映了当时中国法律的一个面向。最重要的是法权会议彰显了主权观念的勃兴,强化了近代中国为废除领事裁判权而效仿西法、改良法律的论证逻辑。     

Fabricating Sovereignty: the Extraterritoriality Conference and Modern Legal Discourse Practice

1926年召开的法权会议作为北洋政府一次废除领事裁判权、收回法权的外交努力源于华盛顿会议关于中国治外法权的决议.此次会议虽被国人寄予厚望却未能废除领事裁判权,而只是出具了一份描述中国法律及司法状况的报告书.法权会议报告书指陈中国法典不完善、司法不独立等等,庶几反映了当时中国法律的一个面向.最重要的是法权会议彰显了主权观念的勃兴,强化了近代中国为废除领事裁判权而效仿西法、改良法律的论证逻辑.     

卢梭的法律思想对法国大革命的影响

本文从法律思想史和制度史的角度,分析和论证了法国启蒙思想家卢梭与法国大革命的关系,提出卢梭的平等、人民主权思想等对法国革命期间尤其是雅各宾派的法治实践具有深刻的影响.     

Headscarves, Human Rights, and Harmonious Multicultural Society: Implications of the French Ban for Interpretations of Equality

Through the lens of the French law prohibiting Muslim headscarves in schools, this article examines the way in which societal tensions that arise in the context of religious and cultural pluralism are translated into legal discourses relating to human rights and equality. It explores the way in which the law is rooted in France's broader sociopolitical structure and history and contrasts it to the United Kingdom and Turkey. It proposes that the law is based on an anachronistic, formal interpretation of equality that is inappropriate for addressing the inevitable cultural diversity of modern French society, and through its permeation into law and policymaking more widely, it is a primary cause of the heightened social tensions involving the Muslim minority. An assessment of the legitimacy of a law that restricts minority groups' cultural practices in this way in any society should be based on a substantive interpretation of equality and should necessarily involve an active endeavor to understand the meanings of those cultural practices for those groups within their distinct context. Upon this foundation, law and policy can be developed in a way that better reconciles the pluralism of modern society with the common objectives of social harmony, stability, and tolerance.     

Legal Regime and Contractual Flexibility: A Comparison of Business's Organizational Choices in France and the United States during the Era of Industrialization

We compare the law governing business organizational forms inFrance and the United States during the nineteenth century andfind that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the contractingenvironment in the U.S. was neither freer nor more flexiblethan in France. U.S. businesses had a more limited menu of organizationalchoices and also much less ability to adapt the basic formsto meet their needs. Moreover, American law did not evolve anymore readily in response to economic change than French law.In both nations, major changes in the rules governing organizationalforms required the passage of new statutes.     

A Conversation with Tibetans? Reconsidering the Relationship between Religious Beliefs and Secular Legal Discourse

Over cups of chai, a conversation between U.S. law professors and Tibetan exiles about the formation of a new democratic Tibetan government under the Dalai Lama goes awry. This article investigates why the misunderstandings occurred by presenting the context of the Tibetan and U. S. concepts of sacredness and secularity. The former Tibetan government and legal system are explained in some derail as well as the Tibetan wiew of the sacred and secular spheres in society. The deistic origins of the U.S. Constitution and the pervasive religious cosmology of the Framers are then described. These two similar positions are contrasted with the current modern and postmodern positions of an all-encompassing secular sphere that defines and contains religion. The author argues that "sacred" and "secular" have changed positions, with secularity now having an unmarked positive value and being viewed by U.S. law professors as a necessity for a democratic political and legal system. As the conversation with the Tibetans demonstrates, the richness and power of an integrated sacred perspective is difficult to comprehend from a hegemonic secular public space. Reformulating this "inarticulate debate" will be necessary for a coherent conversation to take place.