论民行检察与公益诉讼的耦合性

公益诉讼理论为维护公共利益提供了一种新模式,需要在既有制度体系中寻求合理衔接和耦合。民行检察制度作为检察监督权的表现形式,具有维护公益的制度功能。公益诉讼和民行检察在价值目标、案件性质、案件范围、启动方式、司法规制上具有内在的藕合性,这种藕合性分析有可能为两种制度的完善和实践提供新的视角。     

捕诉工作协调监督机制研究

捕诉工作协调监督机制反映了检察机关内部侦查监督部门与公诉部门的一种分工协调关系。加强捕诉协调监督机制建设是检察机关业务建设的重要组成部分,强化捕诉衔接,促进捕诉协调,形成捕诉互补办案机制,是提高刑事办案质量及诉讼效率、发挥检察机关在诉讼监督方面整体效能的重要方面。     

律师伪证罪的追诉程序探析

刑法第306条规定的"律师伪证罪",往往成为侦控机关对律师实施职业报复的工具。究其原因,不惟在于实体法之不完善,更在于缺乏正当法律程序的保障。借鉴法治先进国家的经验,有必要在我国刑事诉讼法中增设集体回避及管辖异议制度、排除辩护人程序、追究律师刑事责任的前置程序、对律师采取强制侦查措施的特殊保障等,以保障律师免受非法或不当的刑事追诉,维护其合法执业权利。     

简易程序公诉案件出庭对公诉工作的影响及对策

修改后的《刑事诉讼》法明确规定适用简易程序审理的公诉案件,人民检察院应当派员出庭,这一规定给检察机关公诉工作带来积极影响和巨大的挑战.检察机关应当采取加强公诉人员配备、简化庭审程序、建立“三集中”工作机制、设立简易程序量刑激励制度以及强化检察机关的量刑建议权等措施应对简易程序公诉案件出庭对公诉工作的不利影响.     

Lines of sight: on the visualization of unknown futures

This article considers the specific mode of visualization that is at work in contemporary border security practices. Taking inspiration from art historian Jonathan Crary's genealogies of attention, it situates homeland security visuality in a particular economy of attention or attentiveness to the world. How is it that we come to focus on some elements of our way of life, establish them as normal and designate deviations from the norm? How does this algorithmic attentiveness break up the visual field, ‘pixelating’ sensory data so that it can be reintegrated to project a picture of a person? The pre-emptive lines of sight emerging in contemporary security practice become precisely a means of visualizing unknown futures. The article concludes with reflections on the creative artistic forms of attention that flourish even where the lines of sight of the consumer, the citizen, the border guard, the traveller, the migrant appear ever more directed and delimited. It is in these more creative modes of attention that we find one of the most important resources to contemporary political life – the capacity to question the ‘better picture’, to disrupt what we see as ordinary or out of the ordinary and confront the routines of our lives anew.     

论刑事证明标准及其对公诉工作之意义

刑事证明标准是衡量刑事证据证明案件事实是否达到证明要求的基本准则,具有内在等级性.刑事证明可分为三级标准和不同的适用范围,刑事证明标准的等级性对公诉工作有重要意义.     

We all dreamed it: the politics of knowing and un-knowing the “war on terror”

This article begins via an exploration of Jean Baudrillard's provocative claim that we dreamed of the ‘events of 9/11’ prior to their occurrence. Baudrillard's particular quote is introduced to raise questions about the politics of knowing and un-knowing in International Relations, with specific reference to risk and the “war on terror”. Building on postcolonial scholarship, this article points to the limits of contemporary approaches to risk and offers an alternative methodological approach – one it argues better identifies the power relations that structure the daily forms of knowing and un-knowing that give meaning to and invigorate articulations of risk.     

The (non) event of state terror: drones and divine violence

In this article, we interrogate how the logic of the drone reconfigures state terrorism through the politics of (in)visibility. We argue that the everyday life of the drone can be both dull and disastrous, and thus demonstrates how state and non-state terror operate around different logics of visibility and witnessing. Enhanced sight and interpretation of data wrought by drones are distinct from the politicised act of witnessing. State terrorism, however, benefits from the privatisation and depoliticisation of the witnessing of the event through a minimisation of those who appear “visible”. Further, through the language of technology and security, drones help to classify the witnessing of the event. The event produces terror without witness, and without premonition, invoking the omnipresent power of god and thus blending divine retribution with profane catastrophe. We claim that state terror seeks to: (1) limit the exposure of the state to the act of witnessing and remembrance; and (2) through the ethos of privatisation, legalistically control the narrative of violence. In our conclusion, we discuss the implications of warfare in relation to (in)visibility, memory and drones.     

Faking performance together: systems of performance evaluation in Russian enforcement agencies and production of bias and privilege

A specialist on Russian law enforcement examines a critical source of prosecution and conviction bias in that country – the system by which prosecutors, police, judges, and other legal professionals are evaluated. More specifically, she demonstrates how that system (exclusive of any inherent corruption or bias) institutionalizes incentives for the prosecution of large numbers of defendants in routine cases for the purpose of meeting informal quotas. Officials from a variety of law enforcement agencies, seeking to “hit their numbers,” develop techniques of selecting the “right” cases (and avoiding “wrong” ones), manipulating charges depending on the victim's and defendant's statuses.     

迈向统一的公诉政策——以实践中两类公诉政策的适用为分析对象

在对几个基层检察院的调查中发现,实践中存在基于某方面公诉政策的公诉裁量,但检察官在适用公诉政策时有不同的行动机制。这一行动机制在表面上与检察院推行的业务考评机制有关,但更为本质的原因在于实践中一些公诉政策的不明确性与非统一性,甚至非正当性。检察官在公诉政策不明确与非统一的情况下,绝对地排除其适用并不符合现代公诉制度发展的趋势,而且还会引发其他一些问题。基于此,有必要由最高人民检察院制定明确与统一的公诉政策。这除了可以实现通过公诉政策调控公诉制度运作的目的之外,更为现实的意义还在于可以阻隔种种非正当性因素对公诉制度的渗透以及增强公诉制度运作的透明性。