论刑事司法中的人权保护

2012年人权入法是我国人权保护工作的又一里程碑。但当前我国刑事法学理论界和刑事司法界均存在这样一种认识误区:将刑事法律当成被追诉人的大宪章,过于强调保护被追诉人的人权,有的甚至提出了宁可错放,也不错判的主张。这种观点不但与三大人权公约冲突、自身存在逻辑矛盾,而且有碍司法公正。事实上,无论是从犯罪的本质、刑罚的根据、刑法的调整对象看,还是从两法的目的与任务看,刑事司法中保护的都应当是包括被害人、被追诉人在内的全体公民的人权。保护方式有三种:通过打击犯罪、消除犯罪对全体公民人权的威胁来直接保护;通过限制刑罚权,防止其对犯罪人人权的过度侵害来间接保护;通过限制刑罚权,防止其对无辜者的侵害来间接保护。将刑事司法的目的与任务定位为保护全体公民人权有利于促进司法公正。     

论刑事司法权利的宪法保护

公民受刑事追究时享有一系列程序性权利 ,涉及人身自由和安全的保障 ,属于基本人权范畴。此类权利应当具有防范国家司法权力侵害的防御功能 ,因此仅仅通过刑事诉讼法予以确定和保护是不够的 ,还应当由宪法加以确定和保障。保障公民的刑事司法权利应当是尊重和保障人权的核心内容。借鉴各国宪法的规定以及有关国家宪法实践 ,我国应当完善公民刑事程序权利宪法保护。     

办理侵犯知识产权犯罪案件若干难点问题思考

知识产权是法律赋予人们对脑力劳动创造的精神产品所享有的权利。其本身就具有很强的专业性和技术性。随着社会经济的发展,在经济利益的趋势下,知识产权侵权行为,甚至是知识产权犯罪行为,愈演愈烈。当人类社会迈入网络时代之后,知识产权犯罪手段又从传统方式向网络化方向发展,     

Race,Crime, and Criminal Justice

Fifty years ago, the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson did not frequently mention race and ethnicity in its discussion of and recommendations for the criminal justice system, but it did have a lot to say about race and crime. Through the use of arrest rates to measure racial differentials in criminal involvement, the Commission concluded that Blacks commit more crime as a consequence of Black people living in greater numbers in criminogenic “slum” conditions. To address racial differences, the Commission favored the Great Society programs of Johnson's War on Poverty. Contemporary criminologists continue to debate the racial distribution of crime, the causes of crimes, and the best policies to reduce crime and racial differentials. The Commission did not anticipate the current debate among scholars regarding how much racial disproportionality exists in the criminal justice system and its causes and consequences. The policies that led to mass incarceration have been significant drivers of continued criminal justice racial disparity. Those policies are inconsistent with the recommendation in The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (1967), upending the pursuit of a more fair and just system.     

Technology and Criminal Justice

The extent and use of technology in the British criminal justice system is uneven. Two areas are examined; first where technology is used in prisons or by the police, and secondly when it is used to develop new sanctions, as with electronic monitoring, or as attachments to existing sanctions such as drug testing. Technology in prisons is mainly in the form of perimeter security, and in the police through CCTV cameras or databases. In the second the emphasis is on tracker systems which gives the supervisor greater control. Technological development in criminal justice is not without its critics. Some regard existing technological developments with suspicion, seeing them as a means of enhancing control, or as an attack on traditional liberal values, or more importantly as an extension of a form of behaviourism which is concerned only with the observable act. Others note the expensive failures of technology where systems fail to work or are delivered late. It is suggested a Government study is required to examine existing technologies and its likely future impact whether on the criminal justice system generally or on those working within it or as inmates.     

全球化和刑事司法

刑事司法的全球化正在逐步成为现实。而且全球化的进程旨在在世界范围内采取联合行动预防和惩治某些特定的犯罪。然而,刑事司法全球化的构建需要建立在统一的刑事司法文化基础上,与修正的报应模式和法律与秩序模式不同的是,刑事司法全球化必须有整合一致的人权文化。提高个体、政治、社会和经济人权的整体文化,是保障建立刑事司法全球化的最佳途径,它服务于国际公共价值和秩序,同时还致力于社会公正,确保相关人员,特别是被害人和被告人的权利保障。     

联合国刑事司法准则与我国刑事法律改革若干问题

1998年10月5日,我国签署了《公民权利和政治权利公约》。该公约最为明确、集中、具体地规定了联合国刑班司法准则．我们有必要将我国的刑事立法与联合国刑事司法准则相对照．寻找差距．并提出改革、完善的具体措施。从而推动我国刑事法律向前发展。试就涉及刑法、刑事诉讼法方面的问题作了一些探讨。     

Basic Social Rights, Constitutional Justice, and Democracy

Abstract.   The theory of rights is crucial as a means of relieving the tension between basic rights and democracy, and as a means of resolving the problem of allocating competence between the constitutional court and the legislature. To some theorists, no tension between basic rights and democracy exists, for the latter presupposes the former. To others, among whom I include myself, tension does exist, for basic rights, in lending protection to certain persons and groups, limit the possibilities of political decision. In this connection it is important to take up the problem of the necessary conditions for realizing basic rights. One of these conditions concerns the delimiting of the scope of institutional action that is found, so to speak, in the space between the constitutional justices and the legislature, the latter as representative of the popular will.     

Participatory Democracy and Criminal Justice

This essay asks if there is a role for an active public in ratcheting down the harsh politics of crime control in the United States and the United Kingdom that has led to increased use of the criminal law and greater severity in punishment. It considers two opposing answers offered by political and legal theorists and then begins to develop a participatory democratic framework for institutional reform.     

复和正义和刑事调解

犯罪自产生以来 ,其恶性随着人类文明的进步而加大 ,相反 ,人类用于对付犯罪的刑罚手段却渐趋轻缓和文明。毫无疑问 ,到目前为止 ,刑罚仍是对付犯罪最为有效的手段之一 ,审判也是解决犯罪问题的主要方式。但由于建立在报应基础之上的刑罚 ,本质上是一种“以恶制恶” ,因此 ,其弊端也是显而易见的。由此 ,在处理犯罪问题时需要引入复和正义 ,并进一步扩大刑事调解范围     

正义:法律与权利

引论 :正义是人之行为的一种属性我们选用“正当行为规则”一术语来指称那些有助益于自生自发秩序之型构的“目的独立”的规则(ｅｎｄ -ｉｎｄｅｐｅｎｄｅｎｔｒｕｌｅｓ) ,并以此与那些“目的依附”的 (ｅｎｄ -ｄｅｐｅｎｄｅｎｔ)组织规则相对照。前者是内部规则 (ｎｏｍｏｓ) ,而内部规则不仅是“私法社会”〔 1〕 的基础 ,而且也是使开放社会得以形成的基础 ;而后者 ,就其作为法律来说 ,乃是确定政府组织问题的公法。然而 ,我们并不认为 ,所有事实上有可能为人们所遵循的正当行为规则都应当被视作是法律 ,而且我们也不认为 ,每一条构…     

American Criminal Justice Exposed

In The Ethics of Capital Punishment: A Philosophical Investigation of Evil and Its Consequences, Matthew Kramer argues that none of the standard rationales used to justify capital punishment successfully vindicates it and that a new justification, the purgative rationale, justifies capital punishment for defilingly evil offenders. In this article, it is argued, first, that a version of retributivism that adheres to the lex talionis as Kramer understands it does seem to call exclusively for the death penalty. Second, it is submitted that the purgative rationale is over-inclusive inasmuch as Kramer considers it applicable to certain offenders with abusive or deprived backgrounds, some offenders indoctrinated to adhere to pernicious ideologies that have impelled their crimes, and wrongdoers who have sincerely repented. Third, doubts are expressed about whether the purgative rationale justifies the execution of any offenders. Even if it is true that the continued existence of an extravagantly evil offender represents an affront to humanity, as Kramer suggests, a moral obligation to execute him does not follow. Since repentance is intrinsically valuable and since repentance would extinguish the affront to humanity, the community in which an unrepentant evil offender abides is duty-bound to foster repentance on the part of the offender by imposing banishment or life imprisonment, sanctions that afford the offender the most extensive opportunity for repentance. The community is therefore obligated to impose one of these sanctions instead of capital punishment.