论证据意义上的事实

研究证据意义上的事实,有助于准确把握事实与事物,案件事实与证据事实的联系与区别,有助于准确理解与把握我国刑事诉讼证据规定首次明文确立的证据裁判原则、意见证据排除规则。事实与事物既有同一性又存在明显差别。事物是事实的载体,事实是事物现象的表述;事物会发生变化,事实却不会变化,事物的变化导致产生新的事实;事物的反面是无,事实的反面是假。案件事实不同于证据事实,案件事实不是适用法律的依据,证据意义上的事实才是适用法律的根据;案件事实的存在形式不受限制,无法被消灭,却有赖于证据证明,证据意义上的事实不仅存在形式和表现方式要受限制,而且还可能被消灭;证据意义上的事实除了具有客观性特征外,还具主观性特征。证人证言中的事实与意见的界定,以及确定证人证言意见性陈述合乎一般生活经验判断的方法,证人根据专业知识就专业问题作出的评论与判断意见性陈述应具有证据事实属性。     

论民事证据排除程序的结构

证据排除程序的结构,是指排除程序中各方主体之间的法律地位和法律关系。本文以证据排除程序是否独立于证明力评价程序及本案诉讼程序为线索,对两大法系证据排除程序的具体阶段构造进行了考察。按照当事人权利与法院权力的关系,可以将证据排除程序的横向结构分为行政程序结构、非讼结构与诉讼结构。这三种结构的正当性依次增强而效率性依次减弱,需要根据具体情况进行设置。     

依间接证据认定协同行为的证明结构

作为垄断协议的一种高级形式——协同行为,其在实施中往往不会遗留直接证据。如何利用间接证据来证明公司间的价格行为属于协同行为成为现代各国反垄断机构的挑战性的课题。利用欧美等国家(地区)的相关判例,并借助于间接证据的特殊分类及在分类证据组合上的特殊性来推定某些行为属于卡特尔,是解决这一难题的有效方法。     

服务型政府建设中必须高度重视法律问题

在依法治国成为国家治理基本方略背景下所建设的服务型政府,必然是法治政府,服务型政府与法律问题密不可分,如影随形,服务型政府建设中必须高度重视法律问题,加大法治建设力度。     

论男女平等、妇女发展与性别和谐

平等、发展与和谐已成为现阶段我国妇女运动发展的主题。平等与发展互为条件,只有在平等与发展的基础上,才能实现性别间的和谐。在平等与发展基础上促进性别和谐的主要途径包括：将性别平等和谐的理念纳入立法和公共政策,逐步消除社会领域以及家庭领域中制度性的性别歧视壁垒;将性别平等和谐的理念纳入整个社会发展的规划,保证妇女在参与发展中实现性别的平等与妇女赋权;从构建平等和谐的先进性别文化入手,为实现性别和谐营造良好的社会环境。     

乘劳动竞赛东风 铸优质精品工程

城建集团在"五比一创"劳动竞赛中,将劳动竞赛作为工会融入企业经济工作的重要渠道。通过强化全员参与,提升了职工的综合素质;通过强化过程管理,形成规范的责任机制;通过强化目标落实,提高了工程建设目标的实效性。在高标准、高质量、高水平地完成工程建设中,发挥了工会组织的作用,铸造企业的优质精品工程。     

When is a group not a political group? the dissolution of the TDI group in the european parliament

This article is about political groups and non-attached members in the European Parliament (EP). Although the strengthening of the former to the detriment of the latter is an old as well as an incremental phenomenon, it is with the current legislature that the struggle between the two has become a central issue of the EP agenda. The peak is the case of the TDI Group (‘Bonino-Le Pen’), the first political group dissolved by the assembly itself, backed by an unprecedented judgment of the Court of First Instance, on the basis of the lack of political affinities between its members. At the same time as shedding light on the way political groups are conceived and the prerogatives they reserve, this episode emphasises the special imperatives of the EP internal organisation and helps to explain the most recent revision of the Rules of Procedure. The study reveals that over time the EP has increasingly enhanced the role of political groups to an extent that non-attached members consider prejudicial for the full exercise of the democratic mandate; moreover, it shows that the requirement of political affinities to form political groups is formal in nature so that only an explicit denial would entail its actual enforcement, as was the case for the TDI Group; finally, while emphasising that the EP's internal structure needs to be considered in the light of the special legislative role and unique transnational features of the institution itself, it warns that reference to other national models can be misleading.     

Pre-parliamentary backgrounds of Australian major party MPs: effects on representation

Legislative recruitment patterns are an important study in the field of political science, given their consequences for the practice of parliamentary government. The Australian parliament is a bicameral legislature, including a powerful elected upper chamber. This article details the pre-parliamentary party backgrounds of Australia's two major parties, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) and the Liberal/National Party coalition (LNP) in the 39th Australian Parliament (1998–2001). It is hypothesised that the pre-parliamentary backgrounds of Upper House major party MPs are dominated by central party experience, while the party experience of Lower House MPs is more significantly localised. It is further hypothesised that these differences in pre-parliamentary backgrounds will remain constant when the respective parties are evaluated individually. This appears something of a paradox given that one would expect central party activists to prefer a legislative career in the lower house, affording them greater ministerial opportunities. The causes of such deviations from expected background distributions amongst legislators is explored. Contrary to traditional findings, upper house MPs are highly partisan, performing functionary roles to assist their lower house colleagues secure re-election. Strong senator partisanship is reflected in the non-parliamentary practice of major party senators. Such partisanship is a consequence of party selection methods, the electoral system and pre-parliamentary party backgrounds, not necessarily the uniquely powerful Australian Senate. It is therefore significant in the Australian polity and may have consequences for less powerful and/or unelected upper chambers in other bicameral parliaments.