哈耶克:自由的两条理路和两种法律观的混淆——对《自由秩序原理》一书的文本分析

在对哈耶克<自由秩序原理>一书的文本分析中,哈耶克混合了自由的道德论证和自由的社会论证这两种不同的论证理路;而正是在这两种论证路径之难以融合的重大张力下,哈耶克最终混淆了两种不同的法律规则观,从而导致了哈耶克法治理论的内在矛盾.     

中国法治的人文道路

现时代需要一种融合中西人文主义之精髓、兼济人的认知理性与道德理性的新人文主义。从人文主义的视角看,道德人文维度与民主政治维度是构建中国法治需要着力加强的两个方面。在法治发展道路上,中国需要协调好法治的道德、功利、政治与行政四个层面,沿着自身的文化传统,打造政治和社会的理性与道德基础,开拓一种具有厚重人文底蕴的"道德的民主法治",实现仁义道德与自然权利、民主法治在现代的历史衔接。     

作为自发秩序的“人肉搜索”——哈耶克二元社会秩序观的进路

根据哈耶克之二元社会秩序观,社会秩序可类分为自发的和建构的;根据其二元社会秩序规则观,社会秩序规则可类分为内部规则与外部规则。其中,自发秩序由内部规则调整,建构的秩序则由外部规则调整。“人肉搜索”作为一种自发形成的信息供给渠道、非主流的社会控制方式和后现代的权利救济机制,其生成具有深远的法社会学根源,属于哈耶克所谓之自发秩序,应以诸内部规则加以调整,但排除刑事规则,尽管哈耶克认为刑法属于内部规则。     

Hart and Raz on the Non-Instrumental Moral Value of the Rule of Law: A Reconsideration

HLA Hart and Joseph Raz are usually interpreted as being fundamentally opposed to Lon Fuller’s argument in The Morality of Law that the principles of the rule of law are of moral value. Hart and Raz are thought to make the ‘instrumental objection’, which says that these principles are of no moral value because they are actually principles derived from reflection on how to best allow the law to guide behaviour. Recently, many theorists have come to Fuller’s defence against Hart and Raz, refuting the ‘instrumental objection’ and affirming the non-instrumental moral value of conformity to the principles of legality. This article argues that although this moral value should be affirmed, the orthodox view is incorrect, because Hart and Raz never understood their arguments about the instrumental or ‘purposive’ value of the principles of legality as denials of their moral value, as a close reading of their work shows.     

行政处罚中择一重罚规则的体系化阐释

择一重罚规则的适用面临执法管辖权与高额罚款权归属主体不一的难题。综合执法制度可以部分解决该问题,在综合执法之外,则需分情况适用不同的解决方案。在识别“罚款数额高的规定”时,应根据法定罚的上限而非决定罚来比较罚款的轻重。根据法定罚款额高的法律作出的决定罚,其数额不能低于法定罚款额低的法律所规定的罚款下限。行政机关错误适用择一重罚规则作出罚款决定,人民法院可以作出变更判决,但变更判决要受禁止不利变更规则的约束。在被人民法院判决撤销并责令重作的情形中,行政机关加重对当事人的罚款,通常应证明其加重罚款没有恶意,因裁量逾越被判决责令重作的除外。     

Natural Law,Basic Goods,and Fiduciary Altruism

Even though fiduciary duties take the highest position in the spectrum of legal altruism, and legal fiduciary altruism sometimes differs from moral fiduciary altruism, natural law morality is not necessarily useless in helping to explain, determine, and justify concrete rules in fiduciary law. Five specific inspirations, in addition to divergences, can be drawn by a closer look at the seven basic goods of John Finnis’ natural law theory. First, the basic good of life may help to determine the boundary of the best interest test under the duty of loyalty. Second, the basic good of play, in particular the distinction between business community and play community may help to justify the separate treatment between civil agency and commercial agency regarding the unconditional power of immediate termination. Third, practical reasonableness may help to explain the rule against set-off under the duty of no conflict. Fourth, different cultural notions of sociability may lead to distinct understandings with regard to the no-profit rule. Fifth, different attitudes towards knowledge in various religious beliefs may create distinct understandings about the burden of informed consent.     

Autonomy and the Rule of Law

Abstract. In this paper I am concerned with the belief that the moral value of the rule of law is based upon some kind of connection between the rule of law and the respect and promotion of personal autonomy. I identify and analyse two possible connections: the rule of law as a sufficient condition for the respect and promotion of personal autonomy, and the rule of law as a necessary condition for personal autonomy. My conclusion is that neither of these two connections grants the moral value of the rule of law.     

融贯民商:职务代理的构造逻辑与规范表达  ——《民法总则》第170条释评

职务代理是一项传统的商事代理制度。职务代理权源于被代理人的意定授权，但其范围和类型受到法律规定的限制，被代理人承受职务代理行为的效果是法律规定的结果。我国《民法总则》第170条系以民商合一理念为指导，首次在民法典总则编中明确规定了职务代理规范。在制度功能上，该规范有助于统一司法裁判。但基于职务代理制度的商事属性，该条第1款的适用范围需被限缩，与职务代理有关的商事登记制度还需完善，职务代理权类型还需细化。同时，该条第2款是职务代理制度的特殊规范，适用时应注意它与表见代理和普通无权代理的区分。未来可在《商法通则》中通过建构统一的商事登记规范和对职务代理权的类型化处理，完善职务代理制度。     

The Juror,the Citizen,and the Human Being: The Presumption of Innocence and the Burden of Judgment

In this essay, I suggest that the criminal trial is not only about the guilt or innocence of the defendant, but also about the character and growth of the jurors and the communities they represent. In earlier work, I have considered the potential impact of law and politics on the character of citizens, and thus on the capacity of citizens to thrive—to live full and rich human lives. Regarding the jury, I have argued that aspects of criminal trial procedure work to fix in jurors a sense of agency in and responsibility for verdicts of conviction. Here, I draw on those ideas with respect to the presumption of innocence. I suggest that the presumption of innocence works not primarily as legal rule, but rather as a moral framing device—a sort of moral discomfort device—encouraging jurors to feel and bear the weight of what they do. I offer an account of character development in which virtues are conceived of not merely as modes of conduct developed through habituation and practice, but also as capacities and ways of being developed in part through understanding and experience. The criminal trial, framed by the presumption of innocence, can be an experience through which jurors and their communities, by learning what it means and feels like to carry a certain sort of moral weight, may engender a certain set of moral strengths—strengths valuable to them not just as jurors, but also as citizens, and as human beings.     

法治思维视阈下科技伦理教育观完善探析——基于当下科技发展中学术道德失范行为现象的思考

学术瑕疵类、学术垄断类失范行为之所以普遍存在,与科技伦理教育观密切相关。当前,我国的科技伦理教育主要存在法治意识淡薄,忽视培养具有法治思维的科技伦理专业人才,以及缺乏法治化制度保障等问题。然而,法治思维作为社会治理的核心思维,具有将其引入科技伦理教育的必要性和可行性。为实现规制学术道德失范行为以净化科技伦理生态的道德理想,需要在科技伦理教育的过程中中融入法治思维并凸显法治作用,从而构筑起坚不可摧的法治屏障。所以,法治思维视域下科技伦理教育观的完善应从德法并重,严重的学术道德失范行为应以法律规制为主,且科技伦理教育中亟待重视法治思维的培育等方面着力;法治思维视域下,高等院校与科研机构对于科研人员科技伦理教育观的培育应从增设科技法和知识产权法课程,强化警示教育,且在对于学术道德失范行为的学术研究和立法规制等方面努力。     

"纯粹法学"视角下的立法权正当行使及其批判

立法权正当行使的判准不能由立法权权力本身来证明,它的判断标准不在于法律的"实证性",更重要的是需要突破"法条"回归立法的"社会"维度。在这种意义上,我们探讨凯尔森的"纯粹法学"对立法权正当行使的影响,并揭示其理论的限度就显得十分必要。哈耶克和莱奥尼对凯尔森的理论进行了深刻的批判。哈耶克从社会理论出发认为立法权正当行使不能超越内部规则,而在莱奥尼看来,立法权正当行使应当来源于个人的诉求。     

Farewell to the Exclusive-Inclusive Debate

In recent years there has an ongoing debate between two versionsof legal positivism. According to one, called exclusive positivism,whenever the law refers to morality, the law necessarily directsits subjects to an external, non-legal, standard, because thereis a conceptual impossibility in incorporating moral standardsinto the law. According to the rival inclusive positivist position,such incorporation is possible, and therefore moral standardscan be (although they need not be) part of the law. In thisarticle I argue that both views are mistaken since they bothassume that whenever words like ‘equality’, ‘justice’etc. appear in the law they refer to moral standards. Rather,I argue, these words refer to legal standards, which are differentfrom the moral standards. As a result the question of the possibilityof incorporation can be avoided, and the debate between exclusiveand inclusive positivists put to rest.     

Form and Agency in Raz’s Legal Positivism

As two parts of one overarching legal positivist project, it is likely assumed that the constitutive elements of Joseph Raz’s analysis of the rule of law are compatible with his thinking on the nature of legal authority. The aim of this article is to call this assumption into question by reading Raz in light of the core, if under-recognised, preoccupation of the jurisprudence of Lon Fuller: namely, the latter’s concern to illuminate the relationship between the distinctive form of law and human agency. This not only opens up a new engagement between Raz and Fuller that was far from exhausted within debates about law and morality, but also reveals tensions between Raz’s analysis of the rule of law and his analysis of legal authority that proponents of Raz’s legal positivism need to address.     

Similar Facts in Civil Cases

This essay evaluates the recent restatement in O’Brienv Chief Constable of South Wales Police of the law on similarfacts in civil proceedings. The two-stage approach propoundedin O’Brien contains a number of conceptual problems. Apparentsimplicity was achieved by avoiding fundamental issues underlyingthis area. Prior to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, judges recognizedthat the common law similar facts rule had a role to play inboth civil and criminal trials; but they gave the rule a widerexclusionary scope in criminal than in civil cases. Adoptionof a moral perspective helps to explain this state of affairs.The rule, so it will be argued, protects the legitimacy of trialdeliberation by forbidding reliance on an assumption that disrespectsthe moral autonomy of the person whose conduct is being judged.This moral objection can arise in civil cases; but it arisesmore frequently and usually with greater force in criminal proceedings.Hence, while there is a need to reserve some judicial powerto disallow proof of similar incidents in the civil context,there is usually less reason for the exercise of that powerin civil cases than at criminal trials.     

Revision of requirements applicable to albumin (human), plasma protein fraction (human), and immune globulin (human). Food and Drug Administration, HHS. Direct final rule

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the biologics regulations by removing, revising, or updating specific regulations applicable to blood derivative products to be more consistent with current practices and to remove unnecessary or outdated requirements. FDA is issuing these amendments directly as a final rule because the agency believes they are noncontroversial and that there is little likelihood that there will be comments opposing the rule. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is publishing a proposed rule under FDA's usual procedures for notice and comment in the event the agency receives any significant adverse comments. If any significant adverse comment is received sufficient to terminate the direct final rule within 30 days after the comment period ends, FDA will consider such comments on the proposed rule in developing the final rule. FDA is issuing this rule as part of the agency's "blood initiative" in which FDA is reviewing and revising, when appropriate, its regulations, policies, guidance, and procedures related to blood products, including plasma derivatives.     

《民法典》夫妻债务认定规则中的“合意型共债”——兼论《民法典》第1064条的体系解读

《民法典》第1064条中所规定的“合意型共债”并未引起学界的普遍重视,但在司法实践中却造成了一定的乱象,并潜藏着巨大的道德风险。通过考察《法国民法典》第1415条的规定,可以发现我国“合意型共债”司法困境的根源所在:并未意识到配偶一方同意内涵的多元性,没有对“授权型合意”与“负债型合意”做出区分。这一区分可以通过对第1064条的文义解释被我国法所吸纳。在此基础上,第1064条规定的共同债务的两种类型得以呈现,第1064条与家事代理权制度、分别财产制约定以及离婚时共同债务的清偿规则间的关系也可得到厘清。     

Medical devices; device tracking--FDA. Final rule; suspension of effective date; notification of status under the Safe Medical Devices Act; technical amendments

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that it is suspending the effective date of the final rule on device tracking that appeared in the Federal Register of May 29, 1992, until August 29, 1993. The agency is also announcing that the revised proposed rule is now a final rule by operation of law. Further, the agency is amending the regulations to make certain technical amendments. This action is being taken to implement requirements of the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990 (the SMDA) and the Medical Device Amendments of 1992 (the 1992 amendments).     

中国传统社会基层治理的法律机制与经验

基层社会治理对于整体社会治理起着重要的基础和支撑作用.在中国传统社会的基层治理中,形成了一套圆融自洽、顺利运行的法律机制,其中蕴含了我国在基层社会治理方面的宝贵经验.传统儒家法与道德相混成,一直将道德教化作为重要的社会治理手段,德治与法治相结合;而基层的自治制度,不论在立法还是司法上,都为国家法律体系的有机组成部分.中...     

Revision to requirements for licensed Anti-Human Globulin and Blood Grouping Reagents. Food and Drug Administration, HHS. Direct final rule

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the biologics regulations applicable to microbiological controls for licensed Anti-Human Globulin (AHG) and Blood Grouping Reagents (BGR). FDA is amending the regulations to remove the requirements that the products be sterile. FDA is publishing this direct final rule because the requirement that these products be sterile is not necessary for the products to be safe, pure, and potent. FDA is issuing these amendments directly as a final rule because they are noncontroversial and there is little likelihood that FDA will receive any significant comments opposing the rule. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is publishing a proposed rule under FDA's usual procedures for notice and comment in the event the agency receives any significant adverse comments. If FDA receives any significant adverse comment that warrants terminating the direct final rule, FDA will consider such comments on the proposed rule in developing the final rule.     

补偿博弈与第三方评估

从对公共利益、公众参与、公平补偿的强调来看,《国有土地上房屋征收与补偿条例》相比《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》进步显著。然而,引入经济学中博弈论概念工具对该征收条例的解读表明,公平补偿能否实现在很大程度上取决于评估机构。该征收条例中一些模糊的规定,以及《国有土地上房屋征收评估办法》赋予评估机构以垄断地位的制度设计,为政府和评估机构的机会主义行为留下了极大的空间。由此,构建有效的第三方评估市场,并在政府报价之后赋予被征收人以真正的自由选择评估机构的权利,是构建法治社会中和谐的征收关系的关键。