论责任政府的宪政基础

责任政府是民主政治时代的产物,是目前世界各国普遍追求的行政目标,也是我国行政体制改革的主要目标之一。建立责任政府的宪政基础就意味着政府必须根据宪法、法律的规定通过行使公共权力以保障、发展公共利益和公民权利。构建责任政府,最重要的基础性工作就是建立健全责任政府的宪政基础,即政府应按照宪法法律的规定来确定政府的行政范围。同时,完善司法机关行政问责机制,积极引导社会公众广泛参与责任政府建设。最后还要建立最高国家权力机关追究政府宪法责任的相关制度,特别是违宪责任追究制度。     

The ICC and the Prevention of Atrocities: Criminological Perspectives

One of the founding principles of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is the prevention of atrocities by punishing those most responsible for them. This paper builds on the literature that has both hailed and critiqued the prospects of the ICC’s ability to deter future atrocities, adding insights from criminology and psychology to enhance the understanding of the ICC’s deterrent capabilities. This will allow for a more careful analysis of how the deterrence process exactly works. The paper then uses these insights to examine the ICC’s experiences over the past 14 years with deterring offenders. The main findings are that, although the ICC can constructively contribute to a normative shift toward accountability and a change in international rules of legitimacy, its prospects for the direct and meaningful deterrence of future atrocities are slim. The current practice of relying on the ICC as a crisis management tool is therefore both unwise and unfair.     

Flexible framing: Analysing innovative austerity talk from a cultural perspective

This article examines how local policy elites conceptualize and communicate potential innovations to overcome the fiscal crisis. Four austerity frames based on cultural theory are developed: an individualist, hierarchist, egalitarian and fatalist frame. Two expectations are tested by tracing frame usage in austerity speeches by the leadership in Birmingham, Cologne and Rotterdam. First, the modest contribution of the individualist frame in NPM‐sceptic Cologne is confirmed, but no evidence is found of individualist dominance in NPM‐minded Birmingham. Second, it is shown that leaders in Birmingham and Rotterdam combine elements of multiple frames so as to create a new promising narrative which opens up routes towards innovation. The importance of ‘frame flexibility’ is stressed to deal with the complexities of coping with the fiscal crisis in ways that are logical (given available views) and innovative (exploring alternative views), and highlight the importance of further developing understandings of such (municipal) coping.     

寻求韩国预防大国在东北亚冲突中的作用

随着中国在地区事务中的作用与责任与日俱增,中国在解决地区安全、贸易及环境问题等方面的合作日益至关重要。美国总统奥巴马曾说,美中关系是美国在国际事务中最重要的关系。但东北亚地区有许多问题会经常引发中美两国产生争议和冲突。本文将论证朝鲜半岛问题本身对这种中美合作关系的负面影响。天安舰事件证明了中美两国合作关系的脆弱性;包括核问题在内旷日持久的＂朝鲜问题＂影响中美关系。美国和中国在如何看待与解决朝鲜问题方面存在分歧。特别是在过去两年内,两个大国之间的分歧已经扩大。因此,本文最后将论述韩国对改善美中关系的作用。为避免冷战格局重现,韩国在朝鲜半岛及东北亚地区应该能够发挥更大的作用。     

关于强制拆迁问题的思考——以执法为民理念为核心视角

我国现阶段拆迁实践中,由于行政强制拆迁引发的强拆事件居多,成了影响和谐社会建设的一大难题。强拆事件的出现,既有制度的原因,更有理念的影响,因此要解决强拆冲突,除了应规范政府职能、以司法强拆取代行政强拆、实现补偿标准的市场化、严惩非法拆迁行为外,执法为民理念的强化尤为重要。     

中国都市群网络化治理模式研究

区域主义、新区域主义的兴起,使都市群治理问题成为全球化和区域化发展潮流中的焦点问题。实践证明,政府主导的集权化都市群治理模式过于强化政府的权力本位主义,无法保障公共资源的有效配置和公共服务的有效供给;市场化主导的分权化都市群治理模式容易导致恶性竞争、资源浪费等问题,也未能弥补政府集权化治理中的缺陷。本文认为,在网络化时代,网络化治理模式不仅对政府和市场为主导的都市群治理模式提出了质疑和反思,还为治理中国都市群发展过程中出现的管理体制问题、城市政府之间关系问题提供了新视角。因此,构建网络化治理模式本身也是当代中国都市群发展的重要内容,对都市群治理具有重要的现实意义和理论研究意义。     

Judgment and Calculation in the Selection of Sentence

Formal sentencing guidelines, which are increasingly seen as the best means of eliminating unwarranted disparity, have undoubted merits. Well-crafted guidelines can promote more transparent and coherent sentencing practices. Their primary goal will usually be to ensure that similarly situated offenders convicted of similar offences receive broadly similar penalties. This, in turn, should increase public confidence in the criminal justice system. Judicially-developed guidance has its own advantages. A judgment, unlike a statute or a formal guideline, must persuade its audience as to the merits of the decision reached. Appeal court sentencing judgments must (or ideally should) engage in some degree of moral reasoning so as to explain why a particular offence or offender deserves the penalty that is being imposed or upheld. Adjudication of this nature plays an important role in stimulating debate and deliberation about the purposes of punishment, the appropriate use of particular sentencing options, the relevance of various offence- and offender-related factors and other fundamental questions about which opinions will inevitably change over time. Although they may have distinct epistemic properties and different objectives, formal guidelines and judicially-developed principles have their own unique merits. We should therefore aim for a system that incorporates the best qualities of both. In practice, this means that guidelines should be so constructed as to leave space for judicial deliberation about fundamental principles and current practice. In this way, guideline creators and courts can continue to learn from each other.