言论自由、出版自由、新闻自由的主体及其法律保护

言论自由的主体是自然人 ,出版自由的主体是自然人和法人 ,新闻自由的主体是法人。法律应当对言论区别不同类型给以相应的保护 ;对出版自由 ,法律既要保护 ,又要限制 ,但二者的界限尚有待明确 ;法律对新闻自由在保护的同时 ,要注意它与公民个人权利、与国家权力、与公众人物的利益发生冲突时应采取不同的调整手段。     

问题与变革：宪法学视域中的中国社团立法

中国社团立法对于加强社团的登记管理起到了积极作用,但总体来讲还不能完全适应社会发展的需要。现行的社团立法在指导思想、法律位阶、双重管理体制、社团设立的法律制度等方面存在一些问题,对结社自由限制过于严格。为了更有效地保障宪法的结社自由权利,维护社会秩序,需要对现行的社团立法进行变革,在结社自由的保障与限制之间实现平衡。     

和谐社会、法治文明与公民权利保障

建设和谐社会的目标包括了法治建设的根本内容,法治文明、法治社会是和谐社会的要求和保障。法治文明形成的历史过程决定现代法治必然以保障公民权利为和谐,保障公民权利贯穿于法治文明的各项内在要求。我国要建立社会主义和谐社会,必须通过改进公民权利规定、进一步合理约束政府权力和完善公民权利表达与救济途径来实现。此外,针对社会中特殊群体,国家须采取特别措施,以真正保障全体公民的权利。     

宪法保留：对基本自由权利限制的限制原则

法律保留原则要求某些重要事项必须留给立法机关以法律的形式加以规定,目的是约束行政权,防止行政权滥用,并在客观上要求司法机关依法裁判;然而,宪政的本质特征之一是有限政府的理念,即使是立法机关的权力本身也应当是有限度的。实际上,宪政国家违宪审查制度的普遍确立正是主要基于对立法权滥用的矫正;而我国从依法治国到依宪治国思路的转变也在事实上承认了立法权本身存在滥用的可能。因此,从法律保留到宪法保留,是保障人民基本自由权的重要原则,这一原则立基于对多数决暴政的恐惧和对有限政府理念的信奉,它在一定程度上杜绝了宪法一手承认人民基本自由权利,而法律的另一手却又予以剥夺的弊病。     

平等权原则与宽容——以平等和自由的关系为向度

平等和自由之间是存在张力的,且经常表现为一种矛盾关系。国家强制平等往往通过一定的制度来实现,而这种制度如果不能在自由与平等之间保持某种适度平衡,就会导致来自国家或社会的歧视与缺乏宽容。就平等权原则在世界各国宪法上的规定及其实践而言,虽然不同国家的宪政制度和法治文化传统不同,但都体现了宽容的内在性要求,一如美国的"平等保护原则"和德国的"法律上的平等与禁止恣意原则"。鉴于我国人民代表大会制度下的"立法归类"可能造成的歧视和不宽容,将"法律面前人人平等"单纯理解为平等权或法律适用上的平等原则,都是不甚妥当的,它仍然有进一步诠释的余地。在更为根本的宪法原则层面,宽容理念要求确立社会法治国原则,以对传统法治国原则进行修正,以进一步调和自由与平等之间的内在紧张关系。     

Freedom and Futures: Personal Priorities, Institutional Demands and Freedom of Religion

How should one define the legitimate reach of individuals' institutional obligations in the light of their right to freedom of religion? The most divisive settings for this question involve exclusions from certain jobs and schools. At the same time, some fundamental issues of ethics and law lie in the background. One of the most central concerns choice. On one approach, if there are other sources of work or education that do not make the same demands on the objector then she should choose between conforming and taking up that alternative. On another approach, even if there are such alternatives, people should not be confronted with such a dilemma: they should be entitled to stay in their preferred institution, which must make its best effort to accommodate them. The conflict between these two views arises from underlying differences concerning the nature of free choice itself; about the obligations borne by institutions in civil society; and about basic rights. The connections between these notions are investigated, and a way through the disagreement is suggested.     

主权:政治现实、道德理想与法治桥梁

准确把握主权概念是清晰理解国际法与国际关系的基础。只有消除一些误解和歧义才有可能树立正确的观念。就现实而言,主权是对内的命令、调控以及以此为基础的对外代表与参与,主要功能是政府对其行为与利益的辩护与防卫。其根源是社会分工形成的人群分层,并在此基础上形成的制度惯性以及人们对治理形式的路径依赖。其内核是无涉于道德和法律的。在认清主权的非社会契约性、非神圣绝对性之后,必须承认,主权在世界上仍会长期存在。因而有必要在人本主义的价值基点上塑造其理想,即要求主权发挥引领、代表、服务人民,在相互依赖、面临共同未来的人类处境中密切合作的职能。为此,有必要进一步完善权力—权利三角形,使主权的运作受国内宪政和国际法治的引导与制约,促进社会的健康和谐发展。     

美国冒犯性商标注册审查标准的变化及其启示——从涉新冠疫情商标申请谈起

《美国兰哈姆法》第2条a款和我国《商标法》第10条第1款第8项在国际公约义务和惯例、立法目的、条文开放性上有相似之处,但在商标注册层面的表达自由和遵循公序良俗边界的认定上差异巨大。表达自由不应逾越遵循公序良俗的国际惯例和国内司法习惯,美国式的完全放开商标注册层面的表达自由不符合我国传统价值观下公众的合理预期。我国在适用"不良影响"条款时需要把握表达自由与遵循公序良俗二者的界限,避免过宽适用"不良影响"条款而吞噬表达自由的空间,应以本土性价值判断克制条款的适用。     

权利的张扬与追寻——2006年中国权利问题研究综述

2006年的中国权利研究,著述颇丰,学术研讨频率密集且范围广泛,呈现了多元化、立体化的趋势。人权研究生机勃勃,平等权是当下社会生活和权利研究中的一个关键词,农民、农民工等弱势群体的权利保护则是与平等权密切相关的热点问题。传统的权利研究继续深入,新兴权利的研究与日俱增,权利本位理论正在向现实论证扩展,有关权利的理论日益丰满。     

通信权的宪法释义与审查框架--兼与杜强强、王锴、秦小建教授商榷

在"法院调取通话记录""交警查手机"等实践争议引导下,学者们借助基本权利限制的"保护范围—限制—限制的合宪性论证"的审查框架,推进了通信权的宪法释义。但将通话记录排除出通信权的保护范围,并不能有效解决实践难题,且因为过早窄化保护范围而会影响基本权利的保护效果。诉诸隐私权或者个人信息权的方案亦难以成立。应认识到《宪法》第40条存在因制宪者预见不足而产生的宪法漏洞。如果将"检查通信"理解为"示例性规定",则《宪法》第40条容有对通信权限制的其他可能性。在"通信内容"和"非内容的通信信息"分层构造下,可以建立起既能回应生活事实和实践争议,又能落实宪法严格保护目标的教义学体系和审查框架。基本权利个论的研究,有助于反思基本权利保护范围的"宽界定"或"窄界定",以及法律保留体系的普适性等基本权利总论问题。     

在合同自由与社会公益之间——特许权配置解析

纵向限制一直是反垄断法规制的难点,这是因为此类行为多有促进品牌间竞争和抑制品牌内竞争的双重效应,如何取舍殊为不易。美国反托拉斯法对地域限制等纵向限制行为的百年规制历史表明:借助普通法合同自由与社会公益的二元分析框架来界定特许权限范围存在知识上的缺陷,只有同时引入经济分析等其他分析工具才可能对特许权的恰当配置作出更为理性的判断,过于膨胀的权利话语无益于复杂经济问题的解决。     

调解、诉讼与公正——对现代自由社会和儒家传统的反思

调解作为一种解决纷争的做法和制度 ,是我国传统法律文化尤其是儒家法律文化的重要部分。在现代法治社会中 ,调解否已经过时 ?本文首先介绍中国的调解传统的哲学基础、理论和实践 ,然后从现代自由主义和法治理想的角度 ,对传统的调解提出批判。本文进而指出 ,调解在当代的中国以至西方仍有顽强的生命力 ,西方学者对调解作为“解决纠纷的另类选择”之一提出了多种理论依据 ,其中不少与儒家传统的睿见不谋而合。本文的结论是 ,经过“创造性转化”后的调解理论与实践能对现代文明作出贡献 ,由此可见 ,传统文化遗产在现代仍是十分宝贵和有用的资源。     

论国家法与市民社会的默契——对一起“不予行政许可案”的法社会学“凝视”

政府对门头牌匾的行政许可以民间协议为前置条件,这是国家制定法与民间私人协议默契合作的一个新范例。作为一个创新的行政指导模型,其主要的价值和意义在于:具有作为公民参与下之“善法”的优良品质;通过在国家意志和公民意志之间建立双向互动、共同决定的价值整合平台促进社会和谐;促进并提高了公民对其权利实现的实际操作能力;同时也可以有效减少行政管理成本、帮助政府减少抗法事件的产生。这种制度设计成功地克服了经济学中所谓的“信息不对称”问题。该模型对其他类似行政许可事项有全国性参照和指导意义。     

Use of drugs of abuse in less than 30-year-old drivers killed in a road crash in France: A spectacular increase for cannabis, cocaine and amphetamines

A collaborative study was conducted in France in order to determine the prevalence of cannabinoids, opiates, cocaine metabolites and amphetamines in blood samples from drivers killed in road accidents in 2003 and 2004 and to compare these values with those of a previous study performed during the period 2000–2001 involving 900 drivers. Blood samples were provided from 2003 under 30-year-old drivers, killed in a traffic accident. Drugs of abuse were determined by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry using the same analytical procedures in all the 12 laboratories.The most frequently observed compounds were by far cannabinoids, that tested positive in 39.6% of the total number of samples. Δ⁹ tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the most active of the principle constituents in marijuana (cannabis sativa), was detected in the blood of 28.9% drivers and was the single drug of abuse in 80.2% of the positive cases. It was associated with amphetamines in 7.4% and with opiates and cocaine in 1.9 and 4.8%, respectively. Amphetamines were present in 3.1% of the total number of samples, cocaine metabolites in 3.0% and opiates in 3.5%.When comparing these results with those of a previous study performed 3 years before, a significant increase is observed for THC (28.9% versus 16.9%), cocaine metabolites (3.0% versus 0.2%) and amphetamines (3.1% versus 1.4%).This study demonstrates the critical necessity of implementing in France as soon as possible systematical roadside testing for drugs of abuse.     

Rights,responsibilities and regulation – the three Rs of education: a consideration of the state's control over parental choice in education

Education is both a right and a responsibility. International instruments such as the International covenant on civil and political rights and the International convention on the rights of the child affirm the right of all children to education. This right is spelt out in the education legislation of all states and territories in Australia. Education is not only free but is compulsory for all children between certain ages. The obligation is imposed on parents (in accordance with definitions contained therein) to ensure that their children are both enrolled at and attend school. However, parental choice of education provider is allowed within each jurisdiction by way of state, private or church schools, all of which are registered and regulated to varying degrees by the state. The legislation of each jurisdiction also makes some degree of provision for parents who choose to opt out their children from any formal education setting and to educate them at home. Home education is also subject to state regulation. The assumption by the state of the responsibility for education guides this policy and legislation. The argument for state control of all education, no matter how and by whom it is provided, is that the state has an overriding interest in ensuring the economic well-being of its citizens and the growth of its intellectual capital. The state acknowledges that the responsibility for education is shared with parents, primarily by providing penalties for parents who fail to ensure enrolment and attendance of their children at a school. There is evidence that more and more parents in developed countries worldwide are choosing to educate their children at home, and anecdotal evidence suggests that Australia is part of this trend. To this end, this article critically examines the balance and relationship between the exercise of parental choice and responsibility in education, and state regulation and control. It does so by examining the means by which the legislation of different jurisdictions allows for choice in the exercise of the right to education, with particular reference to home education, places limitations on that choice and imposes control on the delivery of education outside state schools.     

The media coverage of court proceedings in Europe: Striking a balance between freedom of expression and fair process

Press curiosity to report on legal proceedings has been a salacious feature in history of mass media. Pre-trial comment, media coverage of press proceedings and the protection of privacy of the defendant are some of the main legal issues which are raised by the ambiguous relation of media to court proceedings. The Internet revolution and the emergence of the blogosphere have added a new dimension to the analysis of these legal issues. A balance between freedom of expression and the guarantee of a fair unprejudiced process has to be achieved in the context of application of legal mechanisms of protection of the justice’s authority, such as contempt of court. As regards the question of media coverage of the court proceedings, the decision of the UK Supreme Court on May 2011 to permit television coverage of its hearings demonstrates an important shift as regards how publicity is perceived by the administration of justice in the UK, while there is a certain disparity between national legislators in the way they deal with this issue at a European level. The legal question of the protection of the defendant through the effective guarantee of the presumption of innocence and, consequently, that of a fair trial is often combined with the debate about the right of the defendant’s privacy not only when there is a pressing social need for information to the public before or during the court trial but also many years after the end of the legal proceedings.     

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.     

Ethics of Emotions as Ethics of Human Rights: A Jurisprudence of Sympathy in Adorno, Horkheimer and Rorty

This article considers in a different light the relationship between legal theory and ethics by means of an interpretation of the thought of Adorno and Horkheimer, and of the writings of Richard Rorty, as two moments of a marginal stream of ethics of passions that runs beneath the history of rationalist Western philosophy. It departs from the critique of Modernity as a dialectic of barbarism and civilisation, and from a genealogy of Auschwitz that finds its antecedents in Kantian morality. It also characterises modern culture as one of apathy and bourgeois stoicism, and establishes a link between the cold modern ethos and the dynamics of Nazi hardness. The article turns then to a consideration of some of the responses to the comprehensive crisis of Modernity: the imperative ‘Auschwitz never again’, Adorno’s ‘general enlightenment’ and Horkheimer’s ethics of sympathy. Finally it reflects upon Rorty’s proposal of sentimental education as an effective strategy to foster a human rights culture in Postmodernity, with the aim of bridging the tradition of moral sentiments and contemporary struggles for human rights. I am very grateful to Costas Douzinas, Sonia Romero, Shaun Haselhurst, David-Alexander Smith, José Bellido and the two anonymous referees for their comments, and to Alexander García-Düttman for his suggestions. This text is dedicated to Paul Gready.     

变革与转型:宋代“别籍异财”法的时代特色、成因及意义论析

宋代别籍异财法鲜活的时代特色为:由唐及宋初的妇女奁产不在兄弟财产析分之列,发展到北宋仁宗时的非因父祖财产及因官自置财产,不在论分之限;由唐及宋初的父母服阕后的合用析户,发展到北宋中前期的父母葬后即可辄析家产;由唐及宋初的父母主持不脱离户籍的生分,发展到南宋时期的父母在世,兄弟之间的完全别籍异财;由唐代对别籍异财者的严禁与刑罚,发展到宋代对别籍异财者的逐渐认同与宽容。宋代别籍异财法特色的生成不仅与家庭个体的财产权利意识高涨、已婚妇女的推动有关,更与家产争讼有关;其嬗变历程无疑为我们深刻认识宋代法律的近世化转型提供了一种崭新的视角,亦昭示了法律须随社会变动而变动的法律哲理。     

疑案·存案·结案——从春阿氏案看清代疑案了结技术

清末春阿氏杀夫案在司法档案和纪实小说中有着不同版本。刑部、法部和大理院轮番审理,未能查出事实真相。大理院迫于结案的压力,以存案的方式了结了该案。判决书内容含混,而处理疑案的技艺则甚为高超。以疑案及其结案技术为切入点,重新审视并评价皇权下的司法实况,可以观察到司法现实复杂而生动的本来面目。