论国有船舶的有限管辖豁免

国有船舶管辖豁免经历了从绝对豁免到限制豁免的发展历程。20世纪初以来,国际社会开始通过国内立法、司法判例、国际条约等实践将用于商业目的的国有船舶排除在管辖豁免的范围之外。但在对国有船舶豁免范围予以限制的同时,应当注意明晰以下三个问题:用于商业目的的国有船舶应当依据船舶的用途来界定;国有企业对于所经营的国有船舶不得主张管辖豁免;国有企业具有独立的法人资格,一国法院不得任意扣押与当事船舶无关的其他国有企业的船舶。     

"仰融案"中的豁免与诉讼

一个主权国家在另一国家成为某一诉讼的被告,若该被告国出庭的目的仅仅是为了主张豁免权,则不该被视为同意该法院地国的管辖.即使辽宁省在美国未能成功主张豁免,美国为了避免对外国财产采取强制措施而导致中美外交方面受损,也不会对辽宁省的绝大部分财产采取强制措施.     

投资条约保护伞条款的实践及其基本内涵

保护伞条款要求缔约东道国应该遵守其对另一缔约方投资者的投资所承担的任何义务。保护伞条款的权利主体、义务主体、义务性质和义务范围都存在着一些比较复杂的问题和争议。保护伞条款对于东道国施加了更加严格的国际法约束,对此,可以通过非政府组织参与跨国公法过程的方式予以必要平衡。     

Political Finance Regimes in Southeast Asia: Introduction

ABSTRACT

The three articles in this themed collection investigate the interplay between political finance regimes and the quality of democracy in Southeast Asia. Andreas Ufen's piece on political finance in Malaysia and Singapore argues that the semi-authoritarian regimes in both states have blocked the reform of campaign and party funding regulations in order to keep their opposition in check. The article on Indonesia, authored by Marcus Mietzner, showcases the country's dysfunctional political finance system as a major hurdle toward further democratization. In their contribution on Thailand, Napisa Waitoolkiat and Paul Chambers show that weak political finance regulations have contributed significantly to the shallowness of Thai parties. Overall, the collection demonstrates that without meaningful political finance reforms, Southeast Asia's democratic stagnation is likely to persist for many years to come.     

公民基本权利野视下国家义务的边界

国家义务直接来源于公民基本权利,是公民基本权利的根本保障。然而国家义务并不是绝对的,国家义务以国家权力为运行动力,过度强调国家义务将导致自由丧失殆尽,强调基本权利研究范式转变的同时必须研究国家义务边界。从国家层面看,国家理性和国家能力决定了国家义务所能达到的最大场域;从基本权利层面看,公民基本权利的保护范围和公民基本权利的功能是对国家义务的边界进一步的具体化;从具体法律原则层面看,法律保留原则、比例原则、程序正义原则与公共利益原则决定着国家的实然义务边界。然而,确定国家义务边界并非一蹴而就的事情,还需注意国家义务边界是开放的而非封闭的,确定国家义务边界的各种机制应有共同的目标模式,国家保障基本权利应适时。     

日本舆论监督的法律边界

舆论监督是世界各国宪法普遍保障的一项基本权利。日本法院在舆论监督的两大法律限制——事前限制与国家秘密,从原则上确认了表达自由和新闻监督的重要意义。但是在“《北方杂志》事件”和“家永教科书”等具体判例中,仍然采取相当谨慎的立场,政府在限制新闻出版过程中可以依据相当宽泛的公共利益行使自由裁量。     

紧急状态下的权利保护与救济

紧急状态下为了公共利益、公共秩序的需要政府享有必要的紧急权力,包括更多的限制或剥夺公民的合法权益的权力,在法治时代这种权力也要受法律的理性规制,保护公民合法权益应是紧急状态立法的重要目的或价值取向之一;政府行使紧急权力要遵循一定的法治原则,而公民面对政府紧急权力的行使,除了享有一些不可克减的基本权利外,还应享有知情权、监督权、紧急救助请求权、申请行政复议或提起行政诉讼权、特别损失补偿权、损害赔偿请求权,从而获得有效的救济。     

国家所有权法学诱析

所有权是私法上的概念,而国家所有权兼有公法及私法上的特性,这使得研究国家所有权变得复杂。文章以国家所有权概念为切入点,分析国家所有权的主体、客体、内容、行使及国家所有权保护等相关内容,旨在丰富我国国家所有权理论,以期有益于我国今后的物权立法和国有资产管理体制改革之实践。     

《反恐法》中的境外反恐问题研究

恐怖主义犯罪已成为当今世界各国面临的头号安全问题。恐怖主义犯罪不仅造成严重的人员伤亡、财产损失,还对民族团结和国家统一带来了恶劣影响。为此,我国颁布了《反恐怖主义法》以严厉打击恐怖主义犯罪。其中,境外反恐成为一大亮点。境外反恐具有多方面的必要性。当前,我国在境外反恐上存在反恐合法性、管辖权、恐怖主义犯罪认定与程序、证据交换、境外侦查与引渡等现实难题。对此,我们可以通过建立新型反恐刑事司法合作机制,完善国内立法与司法,以及加强与他国反恐合作等方式予以解决。     

Americanising Brexit Britain's Welfare State?

Will the British welfare state revert to an Americanisation trajectory or retain features of the European model after April 2019? After a period of historically prolonged austerity and substantial working age welfare reform, with the UK facing yet another renegotiation of the social contract in a post‐Brexit world, the question of whether there remains space for an alternative to the ‘American’ model is of crucial importance. We argue that there has been a blurring of differences across the American and European welfare states in terms of working age benefits, as most countries have adopted aspects of work‐based conditionality reforms, which attach the receipt of benefits to the active pursuit of work and, to varying extents, the underlying politics of US welfare reform, where there are large coalitions supportive of more punitive policies towards low‐income adults and minorities. These trends are taking place against the backdrop of a second major shift: increasing restrictions on benefits for immigrants. This double narrowing of the welfare state, making benefits conditional for citizens and excluding those who are not citizens, seemingly sets the agenda for a more restrictive post‐Brexit welfare state. The experience of the last two decades suggests, however, that the adoption of the American model has not been wholesale; steering a middle path between punitive conditional American benefits and more traditionally generous universal benefits is on the agenda across advanced welfare states.