西方国家议会立法改革趋势之探析——兼论政府在立法中的功能角色

20世纪以来在法律和政治理论上处于优越地位的西方国家议会，都已呈现出一种共同趋势，即作为立法机关的地位实际下降了。而政府在很大程度上主导、直至支配着立法。为应对此种变化，当代西方国家议会趋于在统一掌握立法最终审议权和控制权的前提下，广泛采用各种更灵活的立法形式。且越来越重视其民主监督功能的发挥，以期一方面强化政府立法的民主保障，加强对政府立法的监督和控制，以协调其立法民主与行政效率的动态统一；另一方面改革和完善议会制度。以实质性地强化其立法审议和立法监督能力。     

论刑事被告人的沉默权

当今大多数国家从立法上肯定了被告人的沉默权,同时又作出了适当的限制.尽管赋予被告人沉默权会产生一些不利的影响,但沉默权是与刑事诉讼的一系列诉讼原则、规则,诉讼制度、结构和国际标准相一致的.从诉讼目的、道德观念、社会文明等法哲学的角度来看,承认沉默权是社会向前发展的一种必然,但是目前我国确立沉默权制度的条件尚未完全具备.     

亲属拒证权制度比较研究

亲属拒证权是刑事诉讼中的一项重要证据规则。通过比较西方两大法系典型代表国家法、德、英、美四国的相关 法律规则,揭示其共同性及其价值基础、差异性及其形成原因,并在此基础上对我国建立相关证据规则建构的必 要性和适切性进行论证,以及对如何建构提出立法建议。     

A Facebook post is born: exploring the process of generating MPs’ social media presence

Research on political communication between MPs and the public has focused on the role, activities and perceptions of the members of parliament (MPs) themselves. However, the authors’ prior research demonstrated that in fact social media necessitate a new prism through which to study such communication. The contribution of the present study is to look at this relationship through the heretofore under-researched prism of those who in fact are doing much of the actual communication (at least in Israel): the parliamentary assistants (PAs). Whereas other studies tend to focus on the communicative contents, the present research deals mainly with the behind-the-scenes processes that produce such content.

In this study 26 PAs were interviewed in Israel’s Knesset regarding three central questions: What are the goals of the MPs’ activities on Facebook? What are the key obstacles perceived by the assistants while maintaining MPs’ Facebook presence? What are the main professional dilemmas that PAs run into during their Facebook activity on behalf of MPs? By addressing these questions, the paper contributes to generating a more comprehensive picture of the ways political Facebook posts are born, and of the processes through which MPs’ social media presence is generated.     

Spokes in the wheel. European affairs and the parliamentary administration of German Landtage

ABSTRACT

Over the last decades, regional parliaments were considered to play a minor role in European affairs. Not only was the salience of the EU low at the regional level, but politicians elected into these bodies also often lacked vested interests and capacities to become more involved in dealing with complex multi-level questions. After the constitutional strengthening of regional parliaments in EU decision-making, this paper considers one under-researched aspect behind the growing appetite of regional parliaments to become more involved in the scrutiny of EU affairs: the role of unelected parliamentary officials. Based on qualitative interviews in 12 German regional parliaments, the authors highlight how regional parliaments exert control over their governments and what role horizontal administrative networks among parliamentary staff play in the engagement of regional parliaments in EU affairs.     

MANDATED CUSTODY EVALUATIONS AND THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL POWER

Kelly and Ramsey are clearly correct that a shift from a “how to” approach to custody evaluations to one that asks the more fundamental question “why” is long overdue. However, in addition to assessing the efficacy of custody evaluations (which Kelly and Ramsey propose), the legal system must also clarify the justification for imposing this extensive—and often expensive—intrusion into the privacy of parents. Three possible justifications for these intrusions are examined in this article: privilege, harm, and voluntariness. Is divorce a privilege, rather than a right, and can qualifications (including intrusive and expensive ones) be attached to requesting that privilege? Are custody evaluations instead justified as a means of avoiding harm to children? If a harm justification is asserted, exactly what harm do evaluations prevent, and how do they accomplish this harm avoidance? Finally, given the high value placed on parental cooperation by the family courts, is it simply too perilous for a parent to oppose a custody evaluation if one is suggested, either by the other parent or by the court? If so, are consents to custody evaluations truly voluntary?     

Electoral Reform and Parliamentary Debates

The early twentieth century saw many democracies adopt proportional representative systems. The textbook explanation, pioneered by Rokkan, emphasize between‐party electoral competition; the rise of the Socialist vote share made Bourgeois parties prefer PR systems to maximize their seat share. While appealing, this account is not entirely compelling. Consequently, scholars are investigating within‐party explanations of support for such reforms. Particularly, Cox, Fiva, and Smith show how list PR enable party leaders to discipline members and build cohesive parties. Relying on roll‐call votes across the Norwegian 1919 electoral reform from two‐round single‐member plurality to closed‐list PR, they show that the internal party cohesion increased following the reform. We investigate how the Norwegian electoral reform changed the content of parliamentary speeches. Comparing speeches from MPs present both before and after the reform, we show how parties become more cohesive in parliamentary debates under list PR than they were under the single‐member‐district system.     

‘A Fair Day’s Wage for a Fair Day’s Work’? Exploring the connection between the parliamentary work of MPs and their electoral support

Electoral systems across Europe increasingly invite candidates to build up a personal reputation to earn votes. In this article, we investigate whether parliamentary work can be considered as a personal vote-earning attribute for incumbent MPs based on data of the 2014 elections in Belgium. The results show that when parliamentary work is operationalised in a narrow way (i.e. as the number of bills and the number of oral and written questions of an MP), this has no influence on the amount of preferential votes. When parliamentary work is defined in a broader way (i.e. also including other aspects of the legislative and control function of MPs), parliamentary work has a significant positive effect for MPs from opposition parties. This supports the claim that the number of legislative and control activities is not sufficient to measure the impact of parliamentary work on preferential votes, but that also other aspects of the work should be taken into account.     

Institutional change in the European Parliament: balancing legislative ethics and parliamentary independence

Research on legislative ethics has shown how scandals often trigger ethics reform; yet, the content of the reform often differs from that of the scandal. Why is this the case? And if scandals don't explain legislative ethics reform outcomes, then what does? If not this kind of external shock, then what factor(s) shape legislative reform outcomes? These questions provide the point of departure for a case study of the European Parliament's 2011 ethics reform. Drawing from the legislative ethics literature and from recent theories of institutional change, the article examines the impact of the scandal that initiated the reform, the interests and strategies of reform agents who wanted a quick reform process that would not undermine the EP's independence; and the institutional order in which those actors were embedded. It argues that an institutional logics perspective offers a convincing and comprehensive account of EP ethics reform, and suggests a new analytical framework that might be used by researchers in future research on legislative ethics.     

Legislative Efficiency and Political Inclusiveness: The Effect of Procedures on Interest Group Mobilization in the European Parliament

This paper contributes to discussions surrounding interest group representation in the European Parliament. Drawing from conceptualizations of legitimacy, and theoretical work on information-access we argue that different procedures bestow a different type of authority to parliamentary committees affecting their legitimacy orientation, in turn impacting the balance between private and public interests mobilised. We assess a population of 10,000 accredited lobbyists, and the procedural output across the 7th legislature’s committees (2009–2014). Our analysis indicates that committees with a higher ratio of Ordinary Legislative Procedures to Own Initiative Reports see greater private interest mobilisation. Conversely, in committees where the procedures’ ratios are inverse we observe greater public interest mobilisation. Theoretically, we provide a novel approach for framing the committee’s nature from a procedural perspective, bridging discussions on interest group mobilisation and the democratic deficit. Empirically, the results overturn the premise of business dominance across the institution’s committees through a unique dataset.