从事实推定走向表见证明

无论是概念界定还是司法实践,事实推定在各国均引发了长期的争议乃至质疑。从实践状况看,法官运用经验法则进行事实推定的模式可分为间接证明和表见证明。为了避免混乱,尤其为了实现武器平等、程序公平和法律适用之统一,我国未来有必要引入表见证明以取代备受争议的事实推定。作为一种证明规则,表见证明的实质在于:将证明对象从要件事实转化为更容易证明的典型的关联事实。这样的证明减轻规则通常以典型事实经过为适用前提,并以盖然性较高的经验法则为基础,从而在防止法官恣意和提高判决的信服力方面发挥重要作用。从证明效力上看,表见证明既未重新分配证明责任,也未降低证明标准,而仅倒置了具体的举证责任。为了动摇表见证明的结论,对方当事人只需提交反证证明其他的非典型事实经过存在重大可能性即可。为了实现表见证明承担的统一法律适用的功能,我国未来还有必要改革审级建构和转变最高人民法院的功能,以构建起表见证明的判例体系。在此方面,德国的学说争鸣与判例经验提供了有益的参考与对照。     

Undermining Prima Facie Consent in the Criminal Law

Even when a person appears to have consented to another’s interference with her interests, we sometimes treat this apparent consent as ineffective. This may either be because the law does not permit consent to validate the actions concerned, or because the consent is undermined by the presence of additional factors which render it insufficiently autonomous to be effective. In this paper I propose that the project of categorising and systematically analysing the latter set of cases, would be furthered by recognising (1) that prima facie consent is undermined when the prima facie consenter’s autonomy to choose whether or not to consent has been unfairly constrained, and (2) that theoretical and doctrinal clarity can be promoted by analysing the factors that unfairly constrain autonomy in the criminal law using a framework developed in contract law to determine analogous questions arising in relation to assent to a contract.     

M.H. Kramer,Torture and Moral Integrity: A Philosophical Enquiry

Netherlands International Law Review -     

Constitutional Referendums: A Theoretical Enquiry

In recent decades the use of referendums to settle major constitutional questions has increased dramatically. Addressing this phenomenon as a case study in the relationship between democracy and constitutional sovereignty, this article has two aims. The first is to argue that these constitutional referendums are categorically different from ordinary, legislative referendums, and that this has important implications for theories of constitutional sovereignty. Secondly, the article suggests that the power of these constitutional referendums to re-order sovereign relations raises significant normative questions surrounding the appropriateness of their use. The article engages with these normative questions, enquiring whether the recent turn in republican political theory towards deliberative democracy may offer a model through which sufficiently democratic referendum processes can be constructed.     

试论表见证明的基本属性与应用功能之界定

在诉讼上,作为一种证明手段,在一定条件下,表见证明的运用始终发挥着独特而不可替代的功能.但是,在实务上,目前表见证明的应用遇到很大的困惑和障碍,究其原因,关键在于,理论上对于表见证明的研究缺乏明确的界定,或者说,虽然有界定,但是,在破解实务上的疑难问题时,涉及的相关概念、范畴与功能有待于进一步明晰.本文试图从表见证明的理论、实务等方面,对其基本属性、有关的争议焦点及应用功能进行论证并取得相应的结论.     

试论表见证明的基本属性与应用功能之界定

在诉讼上,作为一种证明手段,在一定条件下,表见证明的运用始终发挥着独特而不可替代的功能.但是,在实务上,目前表见证明的应用遇到很大的困惑和障碍,究其原因,关键在于,理论上对于表见证明的研究缺乏明确的界定,或者说,虽然有界定,但是,在破解实务上的疑难问题时,涉及的相关概念、范畴与功能有待于进一步明晰.本文试图从表见证明的理论、实务等方面,对其基本属性、有关的争议焦点及应用功能进行论证并取得相应的结论.     

Subjectivity and Law's Fields of Enquiry*

Abstract. Despite some appearances to the contrary, a popular view in jurisprudence is that there is a limited domain which either constitutes the field of enquiry of law or at least delineates the arena from which a particular field of enquiry ought to be selected. This article argues that “law” is comprised of a number of fields of enquiry that may be and are selected subjectively. It is claimed that theories of law may be freed from the perceived need to provide authoritative justification for their field of enquiry, if the role of subjectivity is acknowledged appropriately.     

普实克和夏志清的鲁迅研究及其方法论反思

普实克和夏志清的中国现代文学研究开启了迥异的学术思路和研究范式:普实克同情中国革命,以社会历史分析的方法肯定中国现代文学的现实品格,褒赞鲁迅的历史功绩;而夏志清受新批评派的影响,重视对作品自身价值的鉴别与评价,加上冷战背景和历史偏见,他的鲁迅研究实践了去历史化和矮化鲁迅的诉求。两人的这种学术分歧经过1961—1963年的普夏之争得到了更为鲜明的呈现。本文结合普夏结缘鲁迅的历史背景,追踪他们学术实践的理论资源,辨析普夏之争中各自的鲁迅观和鲁迅研究的特点或局限,最后反思普夏两人的文学史写作与政治偏见、作者意图、历史化之间的复杂关系。     

刑事司法的20个逻辑信条

本文认为分析司法的认知理性和价值理性关系,更能发现诉讼法学和证据学的学术争点,也更容易对司法规则做出理性解释.本文期望,偏于价值研究而忽略认知研究的学者理解,更有效推进先进司法理念的方式是兼顾认知上的基本理论.本文以“信条“形式提出观点,用意在于归纳常识性原则,同时也在于挑明争点,接受不同学术立场的检验.信条的表述方式、论证方式以及一些新概念,是作者个人信念的表达,不是轻率的猜想.希望读者的批评有助于信条的检验.     

刑事司法的20个逻辑信条

本文认为分析司法的认知理性和价值理性关系,更能发现诉讼法学和证据学的学术争点,也更容易对司法规则做出理性解释.本文期望,偏于价值研究而忽略认知研究的学者理解,更有效推进先进司法理念的方式是兼顾认知上的基本理论.本文以"信条"形式提出观点,用意在于归纳常识性原则,同时也在于挑明争点,接受不同学术立场的检验.信条的表述方式、论证方式以及一些新概念,是作者个人信念的表达,不是轻率的猜想.希望读者的批评有助于信条的检验.     

Recidivism Rates Among Child Molesters and Rapists: A Methodological Analysis

We address the high variability in sex offender recidivism rates by examining several of the critical methodological differences that underlie this variability. We used a dataset on 251 sex offenders (136 rapists and 115 child molesters) who were discharged over a 25-year period to examine changes in recidivism as a function of changes in dispositional definition of reoffense (e.g., arrest or conviction), changes in the domain of criminal offenses that are considered, and changes in the length of exposure time. The data indicate that: (a) both rapists and child molesters remain at risk to reoffend long after their discharge, in some cases 15–20 years after discharge; (b) there was a marked underestimation of recidivism when calculating a simple proportion (%) consisting of those who were known to have reoffended during the follow-up period, and (c) there was a marked underestimation of recidivism when the criterion was based on conviction or imprisonment. Forensic, clinical and policy implications of this high variability are discussed.     

对霍菲尔德法律概念论的逻辑分析

霍菲尔德,美国著名的法学家,以对法律概念进行逻辑分析而闻名于世。他认为,法律中最基本的概念“权利”和“义务”至少可以分析为下面8个相互关联的概念:即权利、无权利、特权、义务、权力、无权力、豁免和责任。霍菲尔德的分析不仅得到了学术界的肯定,而且对美国财产法的发展有着重要的作用。我国学者对霍菲尔德的法律概念论有一些介绍,与其他的介绍性文章不同之处在于:本文用逻辑的方法对霍菲尔德的法律概念进行了详细的分析,揭示了这八个概念的具体含义。     

个人主义方法论与私法

在如何处理个人与社会的关系问题上存在着个人主义与整体主义两种不同的思想体系,而它们各自又呈现为价值论的与方法论的两种不同的形态。仅就法学而言,个人主义方法在私法中处于基础地位,是私法研究无可替代的方法,而整体主义方法在私法中只存在着非常有限的适用空间。个人主义方法论在私法中具体表现为私人主体、私人利益、私人自治、自己责任、权利本位、形式平等、交换正义、程序正义与主观价值论等范畴。虽然现在学界已自觉不自觉地在私法领域中运用个人主义方法论,但由于整体主义的影响无处不在, 提倡、张扬个人主义方法论仍具有相当的必要性。     

Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment

Estimates of the incidence of victim gun use from the National CrimeVictimization Survey (NCVS) are consistently lower than are those fromother studies. To examine the divergence, we conducted a survey that gaugedthe impact of methodological differences between the NCVS and the otherstudies. For half of the sample, we asked questions from the NCVS, followedby questions from the other surveys. For the other half of the sample, wepresented the questions in the reverse order. We examined two hypotheses:(1) survey methods account for the divergent results, and (2) the questionscover unrelated activities. The results provided some support for the firsthypothesis, but respondents also reported many more defenses to thequestions from the other surveys than to the NCVS questions. Consistent withthe second hypothesis, this suggests that the NCVS and the other surveysmeasure responses to largely different provocations.     

转售价格维持本身违法原则质疑:先例形成的历史探源

1911年美国联邦最高法院在迈尔斯博士案中判决涉案转售价格维持(RPM)违反《谢尔曼法》。后世逐渐将其解读为确立了RPM本身违法原则,并认为如此判定的理据有二。这种理解对我国反垄断法界认识RPM产生了深远影响。然而,这是一种严重误读。该案引用禁止限制产权让渡法则的目的,并不在于论证限制产权让渡即损害竞争。涉案行为是一种...     

Six Lines: A Methodological Agenda for Critical Gang Studies

Critical Criminology - In the twenty-first century, the established methodological props for gang research have worn increasingly thin. Place-based definitions involving territorial groups confined...     

论讯问、询问笔录在民事诉讼中的证据效力

如何看待讯问、询问笔录在民事诉讼中的证据效力的问题是我国民事诉讼实践中经常遭遇的问题。通过考察和分析,从讯问、询问笔录的实质来看,这两类笔录就是一种记载有关特定的人就某一案件事实所作陈述的文本形式。在民事诉讼中,实际发挥证明作用的是这些文本中的陈述,因此,这些陈述要在民事诉讼中起证明作用就应当按照民事诉讼证据规范的要求,以民事诉讼证据的形式——当事人陈述或证人证言,通过质证获得法院的认定,而非直接以文本的的形式——笔录作为法院认定案件事实的依据。笔者在文章中揭示了人们之所以对讯问、询问笔录的证据效力具有高度敏感性的社会及观念上的原因,并在更深的层次上指出,对这一问题的认识和处理涉及如何处理公权力与私权利的关系问题。本文的认识和结论有助于限制公权力的对私法领域的扩张,防止公权力的滥用。