刑事起诉制度的公正价值

公正是刑事司法活动的最高价值目标。起诉作为刑事诉讼中一个承前启后的重要环节，其公正价值包括二层含义一是实体公正；二是程序公正。实体公正是指在起诉阶段正确认定案件事实，运用法律。程序公正强调在起诉阶段加强对被追诉人的人权保障.实体公正与程序公正共同作用,相辅相成.     

交换的正义与分配的正义——纠纷解决途径的正当性基础解读

民事诉讼程序对于纷争利益的处理,主要是通过合意与决定这两种途径来进行的.合意实质上就是当事人出于自身利益的考虑,而与对方达成的利益交换契约,其正当性主要体现在利益交换方面,要符合交换正义的要求;而决定则是法院根据自己对于正义的理解,对争议问题作出的安排,其正当性则体现在利益的强制配置方面,应当遵循分配正义准则.在具体的案件处理中,两种正义经常交织在一起,共同构成裁判结果的正当性基础.     

The Role,Benefits, and Concerns of Digital Technology in the Family Justice System

Digitalization is increasing across family justice systems around the world. What are the benefits? What will be the impact on professional practice and legal representation? What are the concerns for those who may be digitally disadvantaged? How much can justice itself become digital?     

A Dutiful Voice: Justice in the Distribution of Jury Service

Jury service in the United States is both compulsory and yet distributed to some but not others in a nonsystematic way. Concerns about unfairness in this distribution system have led to legal changes; however, there is still little empirical information on how jurors view the jury selection process. This study considers jury selection in terms of participants' perceptions of procedural and distributive justice. I argue that justice in this setting is related to areas of conflict between the decision maker and the prospective jurors, especially over privacy protection, despite strong rhetoric that jurors minimize their own preferences and rights in this setting. Data from interviews of 194 formerly excused and selected jurors support this contention.     

分配正义的双重路径及其法律调整

财富分配不公是我国现阶段亟待解决的重大社会难题。针对该问题,有学者仅从财富分配正义的单一价值目标展开有关探讨,而忽略或较少涉及到风险分配不公的问题。由于社会分配的对象既包括"看得见摸得着"的财富,也包括"看不见摸不着"的风险,因此,社会分配正义价值目标的实现亦应相应地包含财富分配正义和风险分配正义的双重路径。基于此论点,本文探讨了财富分配正义和风险分配正义各自不同的运行机理和两者之间的互动逻辑关系,并从法律调整的层面上提出和论证了财富分配正义中的"机会正义"和"结果正义"问题以及风险分配正义中的"归责前置机制"和"责任承担机制"问题。     

分配正义与收益公正分配

收益公正分配是转型时期社会公正的重要维度,维系人权保护、经济发展、社会稳定与国家治理,蕴涵着分配正义理论。多种因素决定经济法分配正义是复合正义,强化在市场分配机制基础上的国家再分配职能,以促进社会基本结构的公正。经济法分配正义理论通过奠定收益分配之理论基础,提供收益分配之制度属性的路径促进收益公正分配,进而实现以社会公正为中心的可持续经济发展,推动中国社会顺利转型。而以分配正义为衡量尺度,我国收益分配制度需要进一步完善。     

The Environmental Justice Movement: Equitable Allocation of the Costs and Benefits of Environmental Management Outcomes

We present a review of theoretical and methodological advances in the social scientific literature on environmental inequality/racism and argue for new directions in research efforts that pay more attention to (1) the historical forces driving environmental justice conflicts; (2) the complex role of stakeholders in these struggles; (3) the role of social inequality, particularly the trade-offs between environmental protection and social equity; and (4) the impact of social movement activity on the state of environmental protection. Drawing on a case study of an environmental justice conflict in the United States, we find that environmental inequality impacts many actors with often contradictory and cross-cutting allegiances. These struggles therefore become a moving drama—a process—rather than a cross-sectional outcome. We conclude with an analysis of environmental inequality on a global scale and argue that the role of transnational capital remains largely untheorized in the literature. We suggest new models for explaining environmental inequality's causes and consequences.     

马克思收入分配公平观与我国收入分配关系的调整

目前,我国的收入分配已由过去的平均主义开始转向收入分配差距扩大阶段。如何坚持以马克思的收入分配公平理论为指导,正确处理我国现阶段的公平与效率的关系,已成为构建社会主义和谐社会的一个重要内容,也是中国特色社会主义的本质要求和具体体现。     

Procedural Justice and the Assessment of Civil Justice in Japan

In analyzing the data from a structured interview survey with Japanese litigants of civil trials, we examined the relationships between their perceptions of outcomes and process of the trials, responses to the trials, and evaluation of the judicial system. The results showed that both favorability of trial outcomes and procedural fairness of trials increased satisfaction with the trial outcomes and evaluation of the judicial system. Satisfaction was largely determined by perceived favorability, while the evaluation of the judicial system was largely determined by perceived procedural fairness, suggesting a justice bond effect that justice fortifies people's societal commitment. Consistent with procedural justice theories, the perception of procedural fairness was increased by the sense of control and the appraisal of relational factors, though both were affected by favorability.     

Justice Between Sites of Justice

Michael Blake argues that states are the primary sites of justice for persons and that the function of international justice is to ensure that states interact with each other in ways that preserve the capacity of each to realize justice for their own members. This paper will argue that justice among states requires more of states than that they preserve and maintain each other's capacity as primary sites of justice. Justice among states will require some justification, as well, of the claims of states over resources and territory within their borders. Such a justification, I suggest, must presume a global institutional order, and this will introduce the problem of coercion in the international domain. International coercion will have implications for Blake's understanding of international economic justice since it is premised on the claim that the domestic context is coercive in a way that the international arena is not.     

Justice, Sanctioning, and the Justice Model

The justice model has emerged as an alternative to the discredited rehabilitative ideal as a basis for sanctioning policy. Retributivism or just deserts is offered as the primary justification for the criminal sanction in this model, although sometimes in combination with incapacitation and deterrence as companion rationales for sanctioning. Desert is, additionally, an integral component of a sense of justice that is presented as an attribute of the justice model. Desert, both as a rationale for sanctions and as the basis for justice, is drawn from the philosophical models of Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. However, these models have some rather disturbing implications that have not been addressed by proponents of the justice model. A critical examination of them and their implications for criminology is therefore in order.     

程序公正的价值——兼议实体公正与程序公正冲突的解决

实现公正是法哲学的核心问题。在我国推进法治建设的今天,尤其是目前正处在转型时期,各种利益纠缠在一起,在这样一个价值观剧烈冲突、客观标准剧烈变动,对于实体是否公正不好判断的情况下,程序上的公正就尤为重要了。实体公正与程序公正发生冲突时,应有正确的价值选择以期实现司法公正,实现我国社会主义法治。     

The Justice Model in the Juvenile Justice System: Washington State's Experience

In 1977, the Washington State Legislature enacted radical modifications of its juvenile justice code. Explicitly abandoning the parens patriae philosophy of the juvenile justice system, a "justice" philosophy was adopted. Provisions of the law include a determinate sentencing structure, the divestiture of status offenses, greater due process rights for juveniles, and a formalized diversion process which emphasizes accountability rather than treatment. This paper brings together the available research on the implementation of the law to assess how the introduction of a justice approach has influenced equality, fairness, and punishment levels in Washington State's juvenile justice system.     

从《所有人的正义》看英国的刑事司法改革

本文详尽介绍了英国刑事司法改革的背景、宗旨、目标、步骤和具体内容;在此基础上,总结出英国刑事司法改革的五大趋势,并阐述了英国司法改革对我国司法改革的几点启示.     

以融合正义重构人工智能司法的逻辑

我国的人工智能司法发展具有明显的突变特色,缺乏足够的制度和理论调适,广泛应用会带来司法逻辑的内在冲突。司法的社会技术特性和人工智能的自然技术特性之间具有天然的亲和性,为我国人工智能司法广泛应用提供了工具理性基础。但人工智能介入司法会带来原有社会黏合基础改变,无法完全应对司法过程的随机性和偶然性因素,并且会因为技术竞争带来新的不正义。需要扩展法律正义的蕴含,将法律正义的纯粹道德内核扩展为功利-道德内核,将司法从社会技术转换为技术-社会技术;在司法结构上设置技术-社会的双重竞争性机制,以维护基本的演化平衡;通过技术-社会互动的重构实现人工智能介入后的融合正义司法模式。     

How Is Criminal Justice Related to the Rest of Justice?

Are principles of criminal justice derived from a broader conception of justice, or does criminal justice involve some of its own distinctive principles such that it is not—for example—an aspect of distributive justice? Examining considerations regarding luck and desert provides an illuminating approach to this issue. The notion of desert has largely been excised from a great deal of recent political theorizing, and in particular, it has been eliminated from many influential conceptions of distributive justice. It is widely held that the pervasiveness of luck renders desert inappropriate to contexts of distributive justice, and incompatible with the freedom and equality of persons in a just political community. Should considerations of desert also have a minimal role in criminal justice—where they seem to still be important? Are considerations of desert in the context of criminal justice consistent with persons being free and equal participants in a just political community? How are principles of criminal justice related to principles of distributive justice and political justice in an overall just society? Many scholars agree that criminal justice presupposes an adequately just society. Still, that leaves open just how criminal justice relates to justice overall. That is the present topic.