解读“技术侦查”与“乔装侦查”——以《刑事诉讼法修正案》为中心的规范分析

第十一届全国人民代表大会第五次会议通过了《关于修改<中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法>的决定》(即《刑事诉讼法修正案》),明文规定在《刑事诉讼法》第二编第二章第七节后增加第八节"技术侦查措施"。但是,《刑事诉讼法修正案》在技术侦查措施的立法技术上采取了"概括授权"的方式,即仅笼统规定侦查机关对于危害国家安全犯罪、恐怖活动犯罪、黑社会性质的组织犯罪、重大毒品犯罪或者其他严重危害社会的犯罪案件,根据侦查犯罪的需要,经过严格的批准手续,有权采取技术侦查措施,而并未明确列举可采取的技术侦查措施的具体种类和手段。与此相关,《刑事诉讼法修正案》在"技术侦查措施"这一章节下同时授权公安机关为了查明案情,在必要的时候,经公安机关负责人决定,可以由有关人员隐匿其身份实施侦查,此即"乔装侦查措施"。问题在于,《刑事诉讼法修正案》在乔装侦查措施的立法技术上同样采取了概括授权的方式,除列举性地规定了作为乔装侦查方式之一的"控制下交付"之外,并未在立法上明文列举乔装侦查措施的具体类型和方式,其结果是造成《刑事诉讼法修正案》中"技术侦查措施"、"乔装侦查措施"等基础概念含义不清、相关法条内容模糊,减损了法条的可操作性,威胁到司法的确定性,可能直接或间接地冲击《刑事诉讼法》保障人权和打击犯罪的终极目的。《刑事诉讼法修正案》施行在即,上述基础概念的界定问题不解决,司法实务中将无法正确操作《刑事诉讼法修正案》中与"技术侦查措施"和"乔装侦查措施"相关的程序与制度。因此,应运用法律解释的方法对"技术侦查措施"和"乔装侦查措施"这两个基础性概念进行规范解释,勘定"技术侦查措施"和"乔装侦查措施"的合理内涵与外延。     

刑事诉讼法再修改与被追诉人财产权的保护

强化对被追诉人财产权利的保护是当代中国刑事诉讼制度与实践的应然内容。当下的刑诉法修正案虽然从价值理念、制度设计与技术规范层面对此展开初步调整,但其价值取向的明确度及对现实需求的回应度尚显不足。未来刑事诉讼法修改应综合考量中国社会的整体变迁、域外法治发达国家司法经验,进一步观照被追诉人的财产权利,建构更契合人权保障要求的程序性保障机制。     

What does it mean to suffer loss? Haxton v Philips Electronics

In Haxton v Philips Electronics the Court of Appeal considered whether a widow could recover the diminution in value of her dependency claim following the defendant's tortious reduction of her life expectancy. The note outlines the development of the common law, demonstrating that Haxton is novel but not unorthodox, and tests whether Haxton's principles can provide a sound foundation for future cases. Positing three hypothetical scenarios, it argues that the disparity in outcome, rather than indicating a lack of unifying principle, as was suggested in Jobling v Associated Dairies, may be explained by combining Austin's division between primary and secondary rights with Gardner and Stevens' contributions as to how they are protected. Restitutio in integrum requires consideration of the reasons and values underlying the right in question and these are discernible in the jurisprudence. The note also considers whether Haxton could have been decided on the basis that a defendant should not profit from its own wrongdoing.     

Electronic evidence: A proposal to reform the presumption of reliability and hearsay

There is a general concern amongst judges, lawyers and legal scholars that evidence in digital format is not to be trusted, given that it can be altered and manipulated with ease. Some jurists have called for a UN Convention on matters relating to the authentication and admissibility of electronic evidence. It is debatable whether such a Convention is necessary, but guidance of an international nature might be welcome, providing that any such guidance remains guidance, and does not ossify into legal requirements that fail to take into account the dynamic and constantly developing changes in information technology. In any event, the accuracy of the presumption in England & Wales that a computer is in order at the material time is highly debatable, and it is suggested that this presumption ought to be reformed.     

Personal budgets in adult social care: the fact and the fiction of the Care Act 2014

ABSTRACT

Personal budgets have been heavily promoted in government policy in England as a means of increasing the personalisation of public services, particularly in the field of adult social care. The Care Act 2014 for the first time creates a statutory requirement for personal budgets to be allocated to all individuals using state funded social care. This article examines how a particular rhetoric has developed in social care policy around personal budgets, which draws freely on the language of the disabled people’s movement and suggests that grassroots ideas are the central purpose for the introduction of personal budgets into policy. It considers whether the promises made in policy are embedded in the 2014 Act and finds that there is a mismatch between claims in social care policy on the one hand and the model of personal budgets created by the 2014 Act on the other. It concludes that the policy rhetoric around personal budgets directly appropriates the language and ideas of the disabled people’s movement while promoting a wholly distinct agenda of public sector marketisation.     

‘That splendid body of women’: nursing,professional registration,and suffragette militancy

ABSTRACT

In the decades before World War One, a group of women fought for their right to control their own futures, claiming that their governance was in the hands of men whose interests lay in keeping women subservient. Initially articulated by an educated, middle-class few, the women's demands were embraced by widening numbers of both women and men. They saw their hopes dashed on several occasions by political manoeuvring, and only after WWI did their demands begin to be met. This is not an account of the women’s suffrage movement, but rather of the fight for the registration of trained nurses. Both movements claimed the right of women to be actors in their public lives and both faced public condemnation for transgressing social boundaries. The two movements interacted, with nurses connecting their struggle to the wider call for women's rights, and with the suffrage movement foregrounding nurses as disenfranchised women professionals.     

日本的皇位继承制度与《皇室典范》

《皇室典范》是基于宪法制定的天皇皇位继承等有关皇室事务的法律。明治时代出于建立天皇专制主义政权的需要,于1889年颁布的《皇室典范》结束了皇位继承混乱无序的历史,作为与宪法具有同等效力的最高法规,确立了天皇至高无上的地位。第二次世界大战结束后,根据新宪法制定的新《皇室典范》,天皇的地位和性质发生了本质变化,但在皇位继承制度方面依然沿袭了明治《皇室典范》的基本原则。这一战后改革不彻底的后果,束缚了皇室的发展,也是当今日本皇室出现继承危机的根源。     

Casting Aside Clanking Medieval Chains: Prerogative,Statute and Article 50 after the EU Referendum

This article confronts the controversies surrounding Article 50 by analysing the relationship between statute and prerogative in the UK. The piece focuses on domestic constitutional issues and suggests a new way of classifying the relationship between statute and prerogative into two types falling under ‘the abeyance principle’ or ‘the frustration principle’. The abeyance principle means that where statute and prerogative overlap, the prerogative goes into abeyance. The frustration principle means that where statute and prerogative give rise to potential inconsistencies, but do not overlap, the prerogative cannot be used inconsistently with the intention of parliament as expressed in the relevant legislation. It then argues that Article 50 has the status of primary or ‘primary‐equivalent’ legislation which could justify applying the abeyance principle. This would mean that the trigger power would be exercised on statutory authority rather than through prerogative powers. If the courts are unable thus to construe the relevant legislation it argues EU law requires the courts to bridge the gap. Alternatively, if the abeyance principle is not applicable, it argues the frustration principle could apply but the circumstances in this litigation fall outside it. In the further alternative, EU law could require the frustration principle itself to be set aside in this case.     

《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。