Discursive Illusions in Legislative Discourse: A Socio-Pragmatic Study

This paper takes the position that interpretations of legal discourse are invariably taken in the context of socio-pragmatic realities to which a particular instance of discourse applies. What makes this process even more complicated is the fact that social realities themselves are often negotiated within the mould of one’s subjective conceptualisations of reality. Institutions and organisations, including people in power, often represent socio-political realities from an ideologically fuelled perspective, engendering many ‘illusory’ categories often a result of contested versions of reality. To substantiate this view, we discuss interpretations of a number of interesting contemporary and controversial laws, including America’s Patriot Act and Hong Kong’s proposed Article 23 of the Basic Law. Both laws can be seen as illustrative of the definitional conflict that abstract concepts such as democracy and human rights are subjected to in their own specific socio-political contexts. While America crowns itself with democracy and Hong Kong struggles to achieve it in effective synthesis with its unique political arrangement, the laws produced by both contrasting political systems are unexpectedly similar, aiming for the moderation of basic rights. The actions of both governments set against their beliefs and discourses, and furthermore set against one another and other media voices, particularly those of non-governmental organisations, political activists, and other socio-political groups, demonstrate contestation of realities, giving rise to ‘discursive illusions’, which seem to be interpreted not so much on the basis of their linguistic construction but more on the basis of socio-pragmatic factors, such as trust, belief, transparency, control and power.     

立法解释的疑问——以刑法立法解释为中心

真正意义上的立法解释,是指在刑法施行过程中,立法机关对发生歧义的规定所作的解释.但是,这种立法解释不符合法治原则的要求,不符合罪刑法定原则,不符合解释的必要性,不符合客观解释目标,也不是发现法律真实含义的有效途径.     

Informative Committees and Legislative Performance in the American States

The information theory of legislative organization suggests that legislative committees are designed to provide their parent chamber with necessary information to legislate. Despite empirical evidence for various aspects of the theory, we have limited knowledge of committees’ influence on legislative outputs. I argue that informative committees are more than information providers, that they also substantively impact legislative outcomes. With supportive evidence from the US state legislatures, this article shows that the presence of an informative committee system not only lowers the number of bills introduced to the legislature but also enhances the chamber's efficiency in transforming legislative proposals into laws.     

论刑事和解在我国司法实践中的完善——以恢复正义理论为视角

近年来,肇始于西方的刑事和解成为了我国刑事法理论界和实务界研究的热点,司法机关更是对其进行了试点并取得了一定的成绩。由于对刑事和解内涵的把握存在一定的偏差,实践中司法机关大多把金钱赔偿作为实现加害人与被害人和解的唯一手段,致使公众对刑事和解不甚了解。以恢复正义理论为视角,从提倡和解手段的多样性、鼓励社区参加刑事和解程序和设立司法机关监督下的独立的调解机构等方面入手,对完善我国司法实践中的刑事和解大有裨益。     

Varieties of Good Governance: A Suggestion of Discursive Plurality

The concepts of good governance and also good administration have increased in popularity over recent years. They have found a convincing conceptual niche on a European and global level. This is also visible in scholarly activity; from the early 1990s on, there has been a wave of good governance talk and consequently, research and criticism. In this article the concepts of good governance and good administration are discussed from a discursive standpoint. The main claim is that the concepts are over-inclusive and can signify a plethora of meanings. Consequently, the mechanisms of this indeterminacy are studied; the criteria according to which good governance and administration are defined vary. This is exemplified in the contexts of the EU and the Council of Europe. Accordingly, different “good-nesses” can contradict each other. It is suggested that the different discourses or vocabularies of good governance and good administration form closed systems of meaning which identify only claims which adhere to their own rationality. Furthermore, these different meanings enable different forms of exercising societal power. The approach is inspired by systems theoretical reading of discourses.     

民法典诉讼时效制度客体的立法设计

对诉讼时效制度客体的研究各异,其研究路径大致分为两种:诉讼时效正当性标准和请求权标准.目前对诉讼时效客体的研究缺乏前提问题的反思,即混淆了制度的客观必然性和主观价值性,以此为基础对诉讼时效客体的分析千差万别,甚至自相矛盾.诉讼时效制度客观必然性和主观价值性的意义不仅在于区分诉讼时效制度客体的一般范围和具体类型,还产生了诉讼时效制度客体具体分析的法律实证化的消极标准和制度价值性的积极标准.通过反思诉讼时效制度客体的研究路径,在区分客观必然性和主观价值性的基础上,对诉讼时效客体的一般范围和具体类型进行分析.     

民事合同与商事合同:学理、实务与立法期待

民事与商事:是否可分与是否能分李志刚:2019年10月13日,在中国人民大学法学院召开的民法典合同编分则草案立法研讨会上,诸多发言者认为,有必要区分民事合同与商事合同,尽可能在合同法分则中体现出商事关系的特点,解决二者的混同甚至错位问题。在某种意义上说,这可能也是决定此次民法典修订评价指数的一个核心要素。最核心的问题,是能否在具体条款上,实现民事规则与商事规则的区分。     

Discursive ethnomethodology: Analysing power and resistance in talk

Abstract

In order to better understand relationships between forms of institutional discourse and social interaction we outline an approach to the study of power in talk which we call discursive ethnomethodology. Following commas on approaches to the study of language and power, we illustrate our framework through analysis of an interview between a police officer and suspect where the latter exhibits a ‘right to silence’. Essentially, our approach distinguishes between two aspects of talk as event the immediate participation context, end the discursive or ‘folk-model’ resources employed by participants in context. Corresponding to these aspects are implicit/explicit expressions of power and resistance and externally available discursive objects. Through example extracts we illustrate how this framework can be employed in forensic psychology, bringing together both discursive psychology and critical discourse analysis alongside the ethnomethodological orientation of conversation analysis.     

纯粹经济损失赔偿规则:理论、实践及立法选择

纯粹经济损失是指非因侵害受害人的人身、财产或者绝对权利等而产生的经济损失,具有间接性、经济性等特征。对纯粹经济损失应采取"不赔偿为原则,赔偿为例外"的规则。我国民法通则和一些司法解释已经涵盖了对部分纯粹经济损失的赔偿规则,未来的侵权责任法应当遵循既有传统,同时对第三人侵害债权及虚假陈述造成的纯粹经济损失之赔偿规则作出规定。     

30年“依法行政”在中央与地方立法框架下的实践——以深圳特区立法为基点

在过去的30年中,我国依法行政的理论和行政法制得到了长足发展,历史中的标志性事件可以将该发展阶段分为相应的四个各具特色的阶段。与此同时,深圳市经济的优先发展促成了依法行政相对于全国其他地区的优先发展。深圳市在做好四个方面工作的基础上,其依法行政会得到进一步发展。     

公民有序参与：当代中国立法领域的新课题

中国的民主法治建设离不开广大人民群众的积极参与,唯其如此,社会主义法治才能得到人民的认同,民主才能真正得以落实,“依法治国”的目标才能真正得到实现。作为法治体系中关键一环的立法环节,直接关系到各类社会权利、利益的分配与协调,必须具备广泛的代表性。公民有序参与是中国立法领域的新课题。     

立法簡約主義下的法律實施——《關於刑事訴訟法實施中若干問題的規定》評析

我國刑事訴訟立法長期以來實踐著「立法簡約主義」。所謂「立法簡約主義」就是基於政治或者其他特定因素的考量,在立法中僅以概括、簡約爲目標,俗謂之「宜粗不宜細」。在我國,這種立法風格不僅在刑事訴訟立法中有所體現,在其他法律的制定中也有體現。不過,由於刑事訴訟法屬於手續法,具有很強的訴訟行爲的規範性,只有明確、細緻才具有可操作性。即使較爲詳實的刑事訴訟法,也需要大量司法     

示范诉讼的价值再塑与实践考察

在我国群体性纠纷多发的背景下,深入挖掘示范诉讼的存在价值,将其积极运用于民事诉讼领域,是当前纠纷解决的必然要求。从价值维度来衡量,示范诉讼机制的运行,应达到促使裁判一致化、提高诉讼效率的效果,并在程序进行中注重发挥法官的诉讼指挥权和公共政策的延伸功能。在将示范诉讼从学理上划分为“部分请求型”、“先决关系型”和“同类纷争型”并提炼实践中各种准“示范诉讼”形态的基础上,应当从示范诉讼的各个价值维度出发,细化、充实示范诉讼的程序规范。这一思路可以延展为两个操作层面：一是由双方当事人缔结各类示范诉讼契约,如“示范判决拘束力协议”、“停止争讼协议”、“示范诉讼当事人择定和权限的协议”等;二是由法院适度行使诉讼指挥权,依职权择定示范诉讼当事人,采取优先审理等效率策略,并对未出庭当事人的利益予以关注和保护。     

Linguistic Justice in International Law: An Evaluation of the Discursive Framework

Claims by minority groups to use their own languages in different social contexts are often presented as claims for “linguistic justice”, that is, justice as between speakers of different languages. This article considers how the language of international law can be used to advance such claims, by exploring how international law, as a discourse, approaches questions of language policy. This analysis reveals that international legal texts structure their engagement with “linguistic justice” around two key concepts: equality and culture. Through a close examination of the way in which these concepts function within international legal discourse, the article suggests that this conceptual framework may sometimes constrain, as well as enlarge, the possibilities for justice for minority language speakers. Thus while international law may provide a language for challenging injustices in the linguistic sphere, limitations inherent in this discourse may also restrict its emancipatory potential.