The European Arrest Warrant and the Sovereign State: A Marriage of Convenience?

The article aims to analyse the extent to which mutual recognition and mutual trust in the criminal law area are developing in the EU in the context of the implementation of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). First, an overview of the decisions of the Constitutional Courts in Germany, Poland, Cyprus and Czech Republic will be given. These decisions are evidence of a tension, on the one hand, between mutual recognition and state sovereignty and, on the other hand, between the powers of the European institutions in criminal matters and the fundamental rights of the individual. Second, national case‐law in the UK, Belgium, Spain and Italy will be examined. Third, an analysis of the recent decision of the European Court of Justice of 3 May 2007 will be carried out. Finally, a global assessment of the EAW will be made. Is this instrument effectively promoting normative mutual trust among the judicial authorities in the EU? Should it be amended or is it the wrong response at the wrong time? Some suggestions will be put forward, in light of what is considered to be the nature of the EAW and the birth of this instrument as part of the mutual recognition agenda.     

论规范性文件备案审查结果的溯及力

目前,我国缺乏关于规范性文件备案审查结果溯及力的法律规定,理论上对备案审查结果是否有溯及力等问题也有争议。《全国人大常委会备案审查工作规范(征求意见稿)》规定被撤销的法规嗣后无效,被要求修改或废止的司法解释自议案通过之日起停止施行。此种规定与理论界的认知存在着较大差异,正式通过的《法规、司法解释备案审查工作办法》则取消了有关溯及力的内容。备案审查结果的溯及力涉及法的一致性、法的安定性、公民和组织的权益、公共利益、信赖利益等多种法益,需要对这些相互之间关系复杂的法益进行综合的衡量。在我国,构建规范性文件备案审查溯及力制度,应以专门且更高级别的文件规定备案审查结果的溯及力问题,对立法性文件和司法解释实行备案审查决定上的无差别适用。与此同时,应在衡量法益的基础上赋予“撤销”和“废止”相同的效果,并对基于无效规范所作的司法裁判及其他行为进行效力区分,还应当在比较规范性文件与其所违反的上位法的生效时间的先后顺序的基础上决定溯及力的起点。     

Bridging the gap between facts and norms: mutual trust,the European Arrest Warrant and the rule of law in an interdisciplinary context

The rule-of-law-backsliding in some Member States has subverted not only one of the EU fundamental values but also trust among national authorities when implementing European Arrest Warrants (EAW). However, when evaluating the execution of EAWs issued by countries experiencing rule-of-law crises, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) sought to preserve judicial cooperation and imposed a rather “top-down” view on mutual trust among Member States. This approach seemingly disregards the (dis)trust which has emerged in the EU due to rule-of-law-backsliding and fails to acknowledge the psycho-sociological nature of trust. Drawing on the trust literature, the paper offers novel conceptual elements to rethink mutual trust in the EAW framework. Notably, it critically assesses some of the gaps in the CJEU's interpretation of mutual trust and advances suggestions to embed empirical considerations in the conceptualisation of this principle to bridge the gap between trust in practice and in principle.     

In courts we trust,or should we? Judicial independence as the precondition for the effectiveness of EU law

The present article argues that the EU possesses an arsenal of tools to address dissuasively rule of law problems in the Member States. This shows the double nature of the EU's separation of powers problem. Whereas some states suffer from rule of law decline and a lack of limitation of governmental powers, there is a risk of the crumbling of separation of powers at the EU level, too, where institutions fail to adequately address rule of law violations. Against the EU institutions' lack of forceful action towards rule of law backsliding, domestic courts try to protect judicial independence increasingly via preliminary references. Also, they attempt preventing the proliferation of the consequences of rule of law decline via judicial cooperation in the mutual trust/mutual recognition domain. This article explores to what extent preliminary rulings can make up for the failure to use adequate EU tools of rule of law enforcement.     

On Law and Logic

Abstract. The main purpose of this paper is to explore the role played by logic in the legal domain. In the traditional conception which underlies the movement of codification, judges are able to find in the legal system (the Master System) a unique answer for every legal problem. This entails its completeness, consistency and the possibility of deriving from it the contents of all judicial decisions. Although the ideal model of this conception is supported by important theoretical and political ideals, it has significant shortcomings. The elements of normative systems (Master Systems) are "norms" and not mere "norm-formulations." A "norm" is the meaning attributed to normative linguistic expressions. The set of all normative expressions, such as statutes, codes, etc. forms what is called the Master Book. One of the main problems for the ideal model is the identification of a normative system behind the Master Book. Interpretative arguments are the tools designed to solve these problems. Although the requirements of the model are not totally fulfilled in actual practice, it remains as an effective ideal rational goal behind legal activities linked to adjudication and most theoretical approaches to law.     

社会抚养费法律性质考察——从若干相关行政、司法实践而展开

社会抚养费制度作为计划生育政策推行和保障的一项重要措施,其法律性质为何依然争议不断。通过分析近年来有关社会抚养费的司法判决可以发现,实践中仍然有不少行政部门和司法部门将征收社会抚养费作为一种行政处罚对待。从社会抚养费的规范依据和理论基础来看,将社会抚养费当成一种行政处罚均难以成立。社会抚养费应当属于超生对社会所造成负担的一种经济补偿。对社会抚养费征收的对象、标准、程序和对权利限制的制度都有待重新评估。     

Sources,Recognition and the Unity of the Legal System

A critical analysis of Kelsen’s theory leads to a broad concept of custom, which covers diverse types of customary norms, where the always required conviction of legal bindingness depends on different types of factual and normative reasons. In it we should include a strict concept of custom or legal usage, derogating custom, custom of general international law, custom that establishes an unwritten constitution, custom that establishes a new written constitution, judicial custom which creates a rule of precedent and custom newly expressed in the judicial application of customary rules. The basic norm could be formulated as a constitutive norm: ‘If the norms created through the first historical constitution are effective, then the first historical constitution (and all the norms derived from it) are valid.’ It is thus a customary constitutive rule that recognizes the first historical constitution as valid law. Norms which establish sources of law are constitutive rules, they can be customary norms or legislated norms, but if they are legislated, they have their validity recognized by, directly or indirectly, a constitutive customary norm. By using a broad concept of custom as a conventional practice, Hart implies that general recognition of a customary rule, together with the practice that accompanies it, are sufficient conditions of validity. A doctrine of recognition that is arrived at by means of criticism and a rational reconstruction of the doctrines of Kelsen and Hart regains the essential theses of the traditional recognition theory of Bierling and Engisch.

     

论常识判断与法律判断的衔接与转化

近十年来,我国出现了一些激起社会各界广泛争议的案件,这些案件引起了对公众的常识判断与法律判断之关系的探讨.然而,目前的理论研究因缺乏对常识的本质进行分析,普遍对常识判断与法律判断做异质化处理,这种思考方式并不有助于做出合理的司法裁判.从常识哲学来看,常识判断的正确性并不当然弱于其他类型的判断,它反而与广义的理性等义并且是推理的根本基础.司法裁判要进行合理的归责,就必须实现常识判断与法律判断的衔接及转化.哈特的“承认规则”可被视为是在理论上探讨作为非制度性规范的常识向制度性规范的转化,阐明司法裁判得以从日常生活方式中获取规范性内容的理论进路.     

Mutual Recognition in European Judicial Cooperation: A Step Too Far Too Soon? Case Study—the European Arrest Warrant

Abstract: The European arrest warrant (EAW) is the first and most striking example of the extensive judicial cooperation in criminal matters that is beginning to take place in the European Union. Replacing traditional extradition between EU member states, including the ten accession countries after May 2004, it will operate on the basis of mutual recognition of judicial decisions, thus taking extradition decisions out of the hands of politicians. It rests on the presumption that criminal justice systems are equivalent throughout the EU and that the rights of the defence, in particular, are safeguarded adequately and in a comparable way EU‐wide. However, before the EAW has even been implemented, a number of practical problems are beginning to emerge, in particular in relation to the protection of individual rights and legal certainty in the European judicial space. The way in which these problems are tackled will be a litmus test of the respect for fundamental rights across the EU in the field of justice and home affairs. This article highlights the problems inherent in the rapid development of the principle of mutual recognition and suggests ways in which these problems can be addressed allowing for full protection of fundamental rights within a fully functioning European area of freedom, security, and justice. The EAW will be used to illustrate the prominent features of the emerging landscape of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, providing as it does the most radical example of developments in this field so far and their implications for fundamental rights.     

论新形势下钓鱼岛争端的解决策略——以法律手段为视角

中国对钓鱼岛之主权,有着充分的理据。“搁置争议、共同开发”方针是中国对钓鱼岛争端的重大善意释放,然而时下种种迹象表明,中国缔造的中日互信机制已面临困境。采用法律手段解决钓鱼岛争端势在必行,中国应作好充分的准备将钓鱼岛争端提交国际仲裁或司法解决。     

Traditional Local Justice,Women’s Rights,and the Rule of Law: A Pluralistic Framework

The paper focuses on the application of a particular conception of the rule of law to situations characterized by traditional local justice and legal pluralism. While in the twentieth century international rule‐of‐law programmes were directed almost exclusively at state legal system, they have recently begun to take into account traditional local justice, namely, those institutions which in many world regions represent the main form of effective justice. Starting with a review of the positive and negative aspects of traditional local justice from a rule‐of‐law perspective, the paper underlines the widespread lack of protection of human rights, particularly of women’s rights. Discussing vertical rule‐of‐law functions in contexts of legal pluralism the paper stresses the advantages of an approach to the promotion of the rule of law based on mutual recognition and influence between different legal authorities and sources. It is argued that this “interactive” approach appears best suited to the complex frameworks of relations that characterize present‐day systems of deep legal pluralism. Finally, the paper underlines the correspondence between this approach and a conception of the rule of law as an ideal framework of plural interactions characterized by the limits imposed on the law by the law itself, and it discusses its advantages from the perspective of human rights and women’s rights promotion.     

European Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters

Abstract: European judicial cooperation in criminal matters has its origins under Title VI as part of the Third Pillar (JHA) of the Treaty on European Union, signed on 7 February 1992 in Maastricht. Nevertheless, there have been important amendments to this Treaty and to the contents of the Justice and Home Affairs policy through the Treaty of Amsterdam and the Treaty of Nice (the latter in force since last February), such as, for example, the introduction of the European Prosecutors Cooperation Unit (‘Eurojust’). This brief study is concerned with these innovations as well as some legal instruments in the field of criminal judicial cooperation, in particular extradition, mutual recognition of judicial decisions, mutual assistance in criminal matters and the European arrest warrant which are considered as the most relevant.     

法律修辞学的源流与旨趣

修辞学的当代复兴使法律修辞学从说服的技艺发展为实现裁判合理性的方法论,法律修辞学以关系本体论的法概念论作为理论前提,以论题学为思维方式,在知识属性上体现了分析学与诠释学在法律论证理论上的融合。法律修辞学是作为规范性的法律方法论,适应司法民主化的发展趋势,并使司法中的价值判断活动规范化,但法律修辞学在法律论证中的作用是有限度的,必须警惕修辞在司法过程中的负面作用。     

Intracultural Awareness in Legal Language—Silvio Berlusconi’s Iconography of Law

Against the assumption that legal and normative systems are coextensive with geopolitical units and national spaces, the article advocates for the need to study how different legal and normative semiospheres, within the same geopolitical unit and national space, often give rise to ‘normolects’ that are transversal to socio-economic classes, ethnicities, and cultural lifestyles. The concept of legal and normative ‘imaginaries’ is useful to come to terms with the legal and normative semiotic ideology of such normolects, including their non-verbal dimension and legal-normative semiotic ideologies. More generally, the article prompts legal scholars, and particularly semioticians of law, not to focus exclusively on inter-cultural awareness in legal-normative language but to concentrate also on intra-cultural awareness. As a case study, the article analyses a drawing through which the former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi visualized and advertised for a bill of reform of the Italian judicial system by his Minister of Justice, Angelino Alfano. The semiotic analysis of this visual artifact casts new light on the controversial political and judicial figure of Mr Berlusconi. The drawing is read as a visual embodiment of the conflict between two different legal and normative ideologies within the present-day Italian political and judicial arena. The paradoxes that underpin this iconography of law and mar a rational confrontation of legal-normative arguments in contemporary Italy are uncovered.     

Law and the Evolutionary Turn: The Relevance of Evolutionary Psychology for Legal Positivism

In the present essay, I consider the relevance of evolutionary psychology (EP) for legal positivism, addressing the two main traditions in the legal positivist family: (1) the tradition I identify with the works of Hart and Kelsen and characterize as “normativist,” as it tries to describe law as a purely or, at least, as an essentially normative phenomenon, while remaining true to the ideal of scientific objectivity and value‐neutrality; (2) the tradition I broadly refer to as “legal realism,” which equates law with adjudication and “legal science” with the task of explaining judicial behaviour.     

也论内地和香港相互承认和执行法院判决

内地和香港相互承认和执行法院判决是两地司法协助中的一项重要内容,具有重大的现实研究价值。内地和香港相互承认和执行法院判决是在一国两制下的不同法系间的区际司法协助,不同的社会体制、法律文化乃至不同的司法理念和体制决定了应该根据《基本法》中有关条款和两地的各自立法对符合条件的内地和香港的民商事案件按照程序相互承认并加以执行。     

我国专家辅助人制度创新的实用主义及立法的模糊立场——基于司法实践的一种理论展开

专家辅助人作为源于司法实践的创新制度,历经了最高人民法院规范性文件的认可以及法律上的确认,逐渐成长为一项正式的诉讼制度。然因司法机关相关答复、解释的误释与误导,不仅理论上难以自洽,而且司法实践中也各行其是,以至于影响了该制度的规范性运行。2012年修改的《刑事诉讼法》和《民事诉讼法》对此的规定又因其模糊的立场再度导致司法实践对其与专家证人关系纠缠不清,应当从理论上澄清立法的模糊立场、摆脱司法实践的非制度化扩张,避免对专家证人的盲目效仿,同时还应厘清专家辅助人的中国模式。     

The European Commission's Own ‘Preliminary Reference Procedure’ in Competition Cases?

This article considers the implications of the European Commission, as primary administrative enforcer of competition law in the Union, using its own ‘preliminary reference procedure’, through observations in national court proceedings under Council Regulation 1/2003, to minimise the risks of divergent application of EU anti‐trust rules under the decentralised system of enforcement ushered in by that Regulation. It sets the scene with the relationship between the European Commission and national courts in competition law, before describing the relevant provisions of the Regulation and its accompanying Courts Notice. It then discusses the legal nature of the Commission opinion as a Union instrument. Identifying cases where the Commission has offered observations, it assesses the implications of administrative intervention in judicial decision making. It finds that greater transparency is crucial for legitimacy, legal certainty and maximum impact on consistent application.     

司法诚信的制约因素及实现路径——以刑事司法为视角

司法诚信是指司法机关和司法人员通过自身诚信的司法活动达成的司法行为和司法结果为公众认可、相信的状态。司法诚信问题从根本上反映的是司法状况与公众司法需求的差距问题。司法诚信问题的成因既有司法主体、法律制度、司法体制等司法活动各内在影响因素方面的问题,也有社会公众、社会发展变化等各外在影响因素方面的问题。着眼于制约司法诚信实现的各影响因素,分析、梳理我国司法诚信问题的状况、成因,并探索解决对策有利于切实提升我国的司法诚信水平。