保险人明确说明义务批判

保险合同法可以体系化地解读为意思自治、给付均衡与合理期待三个核心原则的组合。立法者希望籍说明义务来消减信息不对称,贯彻意思自治。但在建构制度规范时,并未考虑信息传送方的履行成本,对信息接收方的识别成本与关注焦点也存在认识误区。这种过度理想化的设计已被实践证明是失败的。立法应废止实质性的明确说明义务,代之以形式化的信息提供义务。对于意思自治的不足,可以通过提升给付均衡度和更有效保障被保险人对获取保险产品的合理期待加以填补。     

中国法史及法史学研究反思——兼论学术研究的规律

中国法史及法史学的研究自上世纪初形成以来,在法学界或为炙手可热的"学科",或为可有可无的"冷门"。这种冷热两极现象的背后,反映的是对学术目标的多种误读。比如,盲目地主张"创新",单纯地强调学术服务于"时势",本末倒置地将"学科"完善视为学术的目的等等。正是这种学术目标的误读,导致中国法史研究长期纠缠于方法的争论而忽视基础问题的研究。纠正学术目标误读的方式在于充分认识并尊重学术研究的规律,对基础问题的研究应在"传承"中创新;培养学人的独立品格,逐渐改善人云亦云的学风;将学科视为学术研究的途径而不是目的,以促进而不是桎梏学术研究的发展。     

The Article 9 Association,Leftist Elites,and the Movement to Save Article 9 of Japan’s Postwar Constitution

Leftist political parties and labor unions that had stood at the forefront of the collective effort to protect Article 9 until the early 1990s have stepped back to some extent as they have shrunk and fragmented. Instead, advocacy groups whose influence is often enhanced by ‘leftist elites’ have now seemed to come more to the fore, thereby raising certain questions: What roles do the leftist elites play in those groups? How are such groups organized? Who exactly are the leftist elites? This article intends to address questions regarding the leftist elites, as well as the organization and development of these advocacy groups, in particular the Article 9 Association.