从宁波工艺品公司案看我国法院对涉外仲裁协议的监督

国家法院对仲裁协议实施监督的核心问题,就是仲裁协议的效力和仲裁庭管辖权的认定：在仲裁程序开始之前,法院就应当根据另一方当事人的请求,令当事人将协议项下的事项提交仲裁解决,除非法院认定仲裁协议无效、失效,或者不能履行;在仲裁程序开始之后,法院仍然有权根据一方当事人的请求对仲裁协议有效性和仲裁庭的管辖权问题进行审理,法院的此项权力来源于法院地国的国内法;在仲裁程序结束之后,当事人还可以裁决所依据的仲裁协议无效为由,申请法院撤销此根据无效仲裁协议作出的裁决,或者拒绝承认与执行此裁决。但如果当事人在仲裁程序中放弃了对仲裁协议有效性或者仲裁庭的管辖权提出异议的权利,则当事人在裁决作出就不能再以仲裁协议无效或者仲裁庭对仲裁协议项下的争议没有管辖权为由,请求法院撤销或者拒绝执行此仲裁裁决。     

审前重复供述的排除问题研究

在非法证据排除规则确立后,审前重复供述的排除问题浮出水面.从确保非法证据排除规则有效实施、消极的实证真实发现主义、人权保障以及遏制刑讯的角度看,审前重复供述应该排除.非法取证行为的持续影响效力理论是排除审前重复供述的依据,排除审前重复供述的标准是刑讯逼供等非法行为与重复供述之间存在因果关系.具体来说,排除重复供述,需要有刑讯逼供等非法取供行为,且该行为对被追诉人产生了较大影响,使其供述自由受到了较大限制.排除非法口供后,可反驳地推定重复供述不具有可采性.控方如欲使用重复供述,需要证明不存在因果关系.排除重复供述可能会遇到诸多障碍,需要通过法官独立司法维护司法公正.     

庭外供述笔录的非自愿性推定原则 --解决刑讯逼供问题的一种立法思路

刑事被告人的庭外供述笔录,也就是侦查人员在剥夺被告人人身自由的情况下所获取的有罪供述笔录,由于讯问过程的秘密性、封闭性和天然强制性,因此应一律被推定为非自愿的言辞证据.除非检控方能够提出证据证明其自愿性,否则,庭外供述笔录应一律被推定为非法的和不可采的证据,刑事法庭既不得准许检控方在法庭上提出该类证据,更不得将其作为定案的根据.经过这种证明责任倒置的技术性改革,侦查人员是否采取刑讯逼供的问题就可以转化成为庭外供述笔录是否具有自愿性和可采性的程序问题.     

论国际商事仲裁中证据的可采性

在国际商事仲裁中,仲裁庭具有认定证据可采性的自由裁量权,不必严格适用各国民事诉讼中的证据可采性规则。不过就一些具体的证据可采性问题,国际上形成了一般实践。仲裁庭在认定证据的可采性时,除了考虑相关性,还可能考虑效率、仲裁费用等因素。另外,仲裁庭认定证据可采性的权力并非没有限制。我国相关仲裁实践存在一些问题,与国际一般实践相脱离,应予以纠正。     

国家赔偿审判亟待程序规范——人民法院应当成立国家赔偿审判庭

《国家赔偿法》在赔偿程序和机构设置上的规定存在严重缺陷。人民法院应当设立国家赔偿审判庭,适用诉讼程序解决国家赔偿案件,现在相关条件已经成熟。     

审判中心主义下的“程序倒逼”机制探析

在审判中心主义的改革背景下,我国刑事诉讼应改变以往的"程序宽容"做法,通过庭审功能的实质性发挥,来强化审判对于侦查、起诉的引导制约作用,严格贯彻落实疑罪从无原则和非法证据排除规则,使法官敢于做出无罪判决、敢于排除非法证据,从而树立审判权威、提高司法公信、保障司法公正,实现从"程序宽容"到"程序倒逼"的转变,并最终逐步实现审判中心主义的改革目标。     

Who Files Suit? Legal Mobilization and Torture Violations in Europe

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is the most active international court. After decades with few allegations of human rights abuses, the ECHR docket expanded in the 1990s. Paradoxically, long‐standing democracies can have standardized violation rates of the prohibition against torture that compare to transitional democracies that struggle to protect rights. Yet it is implausible that human rights abuses increased or that established democracies engage in more torture than new democracies. Instead variations in legal mobilization generate the surge and puzzling distribution of European judgments. I argue that discrepancies between the incidence of torture and litigation reflect variations in support structures, where declared violations can reflect the level of support that individuals receive in pursuing claims rather than the incidence of torture. This dynamic is most pronounced for foreign nationals, who typically possess fewer resources than citizens to access legal institutions and encounter popular and official hostility. As a result, much European litigation concerning torture in long‐standing democracies is transnational in character.     

On the Question of Dutch Courts' Universal Jurisdiction: A Response to Mettraux

In response to Guénaël Mettraux's article regardingthe recent exercise of universal jurisdiction over torture andwar crimes by a Dutch court, the author disputes Mettraux'sreading of these cases on several points. These points includethe legal basis for exercising universal jurisdiction over violationsof Common Article 3 and the criterion of involvement of publicauthorities in the crime of torture.     

我国诉讼监督的一个难点及其破解——析“严禁”语境下的刑讯逼供

我国刑事实体法与程序法均严格禁止刑讯逼供,但在刑事诉讼中刑讯逼供却禁而难止,因刑讯逼供受到查处者为数不多,以致刑法第247条几近虚置。究其原因,一是刑讯逼供合法性的顽固观念妨碍了对刑讯逼供、暴力取证行为的查处;二是对刑讯逼供、暴力取证行为发现不及时;三是对刑讯逼供、暴力取证行为的监督尚有缺位。解决这一问题,首先需要转变司法理念,改善检察监督执法环境;其次,建立顺畅、有效的检察监督机制;再次,对刑讯逼供、暴力取证罪的刑事责任进行立法重构。     

法制现代化进程中的审判组织重构

审判组织改革是中国法制现代化进程的重要组成部分。探求其重构的实现模式 ,需要以体现审判组织的社会属性和社会功能为基本理念 ,对法院设置、审级制度、法院内部审判组织的结构 ,以及法院作为审判组织的整体运作机制等进行综合性的研究。在保持现有的四级法院构架的基础上 ,通过对各级法院职责的重新定位、调整审级制度、设立巡回法庭制度、理顺法院内部各职能部门间的关系等一系列措施来促进审判组织重构的多重价值目标的实现。     

确认仲裁协议有效性的机构及其程序

本文对于确认仲裁协议有效的机构及其程序问题 ,结合国际、国内立法与司法实践进行了重点分析 ,并且针对我国仲裁机构和法律在确认仲裁协议有效性的程序方面发现长处 ,找出不足 ,提出建议性的意见。     

中菲南海争端仲裁案中菲律宾诉求评析

关于中菲南海争端强制仲裁一案,菲律宾向仲裁法庭提出的诉求可合并为针对中国南海传统断续线的诉求、针对南海中中国部分岛礁的诉求和针对中国南海行使管辖权的诉求.对此,中国在应对上可选择向仲裁法庭行使“初步反对的权利”或其他合法方式发表其没有管辖权的理由,并通过反对申请书的可接受性力争结束仲裁.     

Bad Torture -- Good Torture?: What International Criminal Lawyers May Learn from the Recent Trial of Police Officers in Germany

The author discusses whether a state agent who applies tortureagainst a suspect in order to prevent the death of one or moreinnocent persons can successfully plead a ground for excludinghis or her criminal responsibility under national (in particular,German) law as well as international law. The author examinesthe judgment of a German court, which recently found two policeofficers guilty of threatening to use violence against a suspectedkidnapper, but refrained from punishing them on account of theirmotivation to save the life of the hostage. The author maintainsthat the court's ‘guilty, but not to be punished’verdict could provide guidance for the resolution of comparablecases under international criminal law. He submits that thetension between the absolute ban on torture under internationalhuman rights law and the availability of defences even to crimesof torture under international criminal law should be resolvedthrough a human rights-oriented interpretation of the latter.The author concludes that criminal responsibility for tortureunder international criminal law cannot be excluded by the factthat the torturer acts to save innocent life; however, his orher altruistic motivation may be taken into account in determiningthe sentence.     

违法诱惑侦查所获证据之证据能力研究

对于诱惑侦查而言，“机会引诱”因本为合法之侦查取证行为，故其所获证据当为合法，可作为法庭审判定案之根据；但“犯意引诱”作为一种违法侦查行为，一旦成立，则应当排除其所获之全案证据。违法诱惑侦查，系国家制造犯罪，已经逾越侦查犯罪之必要程度、违反宪法对于基本人权之保障、对于公共利益之维护并无意义，因其在性质上已经属于极端严重的违法侦查行为，因此，对于违法诱惑侦查所获之证据，无论言词证据，还是实物证据，均应一律排除。如果被告在审判中提出其遭受侦查机关违法诱惑侦查的抗辩时，类似于被告提出其遭受警方刑讯逼供的抗辩，应由检察官承担证明该阻却犯罪成立事由不存在的举证责任，且由于该事实为直接影响被告罪责之实体事实，因此，举证时应当适用严格证明法则，并应证明至排除合理怀疑（高度盖然性）的程度。     

论刑事诉讼与行政诉讼的冲突及其解决

为解决刑事诉讼中出现的行政问题及行政诉讼中出现的刑事问题,避免行政诉讼与刑事诉讼审理结果的冲突,应将两类诉讼中的相关问题分为本诉附属问题与审判前提问题,允许法院刑事审判庭在特定情况下审理行政问题;在对同一行为究竟应承担刑事责任还是行政责任难以确定时,以“刑事责任优先”为处理原则。     

论仲裁裁决理由

就仲裁裁决理由的问题展开讨论,分析附具裁决理由的原因,探讨附具裁决理由的合理长度及详尽程度,论述裁决理由应该针对之处,并对法院自由裁量权下和仲裁员自由裁量权下作出的裁决、仲裁庭成员之间的合议以及仲裁机构作出的决定是否需要附具理由进行深入探究。     

租赁标的瑕疵与合同救济

租赁标的使用存在公法限制,构成瑕疵;其救济路径除依瑕疵担保主张违约责任之外,尚有依意思表示存在瑕疵(重大误解或者欺诈)主张撤销合同的可能;两种救济路径可由当事人选择。由于权利瑕疵与物的瑕疵在我国法中的构成要件及法律后果均有差异,故对于两类瑕疵进行区分,仍有实际需要。中国合同法在统合瑕疵担保与违约责任的道路上,仍有必要百尺竿头、更进一步。权利瑕疵与物的瑕疵在此处的区分,并无"标准答案";我国实务以标的物受公法限制为一种物的瑕疵,值得赞同。检验通知义务属于不真正义务,检验期间属于除斥期间。瑕疵担保义务属于主给付义务的内容,在其违反具有重大性而使合同目的无法实现场合,可以发生解除权。减价责任的适用通常因当事人行使减价权而引出,惟亦不妨裁判者不经当事人主张而适用减价责任。减价责任虽系物的瑕疵场合的法律后果,在权利瑕疵场合,亦有类推适用的余地。     

中国古代刑讯制度及其评析

刑讯作为野蛮的“刑”与文明的“讯”结合而成的取证方法，在中国古代延续了两千余年，这一方面反映了其不足之处，另一方面却又足以说明了其价值所在。因此，不顾其存在的客观历史奈件而简单地对其功过一概否定或者肯定的观点都是值得商榷的。本文从中国古代刑讯制度的沿革入手，就古代中国刑讯制度化、法律化的形成、原因、特点等诸多相关问题予以了阐述，目的在于客观地评价中国古代的刑讯制度，从而扬“讯”之长，避“刑”之短，以完善今天的证据制度。     

Environmental crime and problem-solving courts

Environmental harms are by their nature complex and as such give rise to formal legal responses that range from simple regulatory intervention to multi-faceted court order. The purpose of this paper is to explore the emergence of environmental courts and the development of judicial and tribunal expertise in this specific area. A wide range of sanctions are now available and being actively applied by such bodies. Moreover, in many instances, the philosophical approach adopted by these courts is that of problem-solving. The combination of specialist expertise and innovative methods of intervention are progressively revolutionising judicial practice in regards to contemporary environmental issues.     

Informal,Inquisitorial, and Accurate: An Empirical Look at a Problem‐Solving Housing Court

Substantive justice is often seen as elusive in courts dominated by low‐income individuals. Complex court rules, coupled with pervasive lack of counsel, can make it difficult for the traditional adversary process to identify and redress legitimate grievances. This article takes on the social problem of substandard housing and examines whether inquisitorial procedure has the potential to produce accurate outcomes in a tribunal dominated by the unrepresented. Relying on in‐court observations of nearly 300 hearings, and a longitudinal review of nearly seventy‐five cases, this article surfaces the regularized procedures utilized by a purported “problem‐solving” housing court, and theorizes that the inquisitorial features of judicially controlled investigation and enforcement may motivate landlords to repair substantiated housing code violations. This article adds nuance to our understanding of informal justice by identifying the hidden procedural formalisms that may guide alternative decision‐making processes. Furthermore, it evaluates the relationship of one iteration of experimental formalism to substantive justice, and suggests that inquisitorial procedures may be correlated with improved accuracy in case outcomes.