THE IMPACT OF BRITISH COUNTERTERRORIST STRATEGIES ON POLITICAL VIOLENCE IN NORTHERN IRELAND: COMPARING DETERRENCE AND BACKLASH MODELS*

Since philosophers Beccaria and Bentham, criminologists have been concerned with predicting how governmental attempts to maintain lawful behavior affect subsequent rates of criminal violence. In this article, we build on prior research to argue that governmental responses to a specific form of criminal violence—terrorism—may produce both a positive deterrence effect (i.e., reducing future incidence of prohibited behavior) and a negative backlash effect (i.e., increasing future incidence of prohibited behavior). Deterrence‐based models have long dominated both criminal justice and counterterrorist policies on responding to violence. The models maintain that an individual's prohibited behavior can be altered by the threat and imposition of punishment. Backlash models are more theoretically scattered but receive mixed support from several sources, which include research on counterterrorism; the criminology literature on labeling, legitimacy, and defiance; and the psychological literature on social power and decision making. In this article, we identify six major British strategies aimed at reducing political violence in Northern Ireland from 1969 to 1992 and then use a Cox proportional hazard model to estimate the impact of these interventions on the risk of new attacks. In general, we find the strongest support for backlash models. The only support for deterrence models was a military surge called Operation Motorman, which was followed by significant declines in the risk of new attacks. The results underscore the importance of considering the possibility that antiterrorist interventions might both increase and decrease subsequent violence.     

Majority representation and legitimacy: Survey-experimental evidence from the European Union

What can policy makers do in day-to-day decision making to strengthen citizens' belief that the political system is legitimate? Much literature has highlighted that the realization of citizens' personal preferences in policy making is an important driver of legitimacy beliefs. We argue that citizens, in addition, also care about whether a policy represents the preferences of the majority of citizens, even if their personal preference diverges from the majority's. Using the case of the European Union (EU) as a system that has recurringly experienced crises of public legitimacy, we conduct a vignette survey experiment in which respondents assess the legitimacy of fictitious EU decisions that vary in how they were taken and whose preferences they represent. Results from original surveys conducted in the five largest EU countries show that the congruence of EU decisions not only with personal opinion but also with different forms of majority opinion significantly strengthens legitimacy beliefs. We also show that the most likely mechanism behind this finding is the application of a ‘consensus heuristic’, by which respondents use majority opinion as a cue to identify legitimate decisions. In contrast, procedural features such as the consultation of interest groups or the inclusiveness of decision making in the institutions have little effect on legitimacy beliefs. These findings suggest that policy makers can address legitimacy deficits by strengthening majority representation, which will have both egotropic and sociotropic effects.     

刑事涉案财物处置的监察调查制度构建与完善

我国《监察法》非常重视涉案财物调查程序之正当性,针对搜查、扣押等调查工作确立了强制录音录像制度。但是,目前刑事涉案财物调查体系制度定位仍存在偏差,如未能体现其财产保全价值;监察机关能否对刑事涉案财物进行实体处分,立法方面语焉不详;利害关系人之权利保障机制尚不健全。应当以人财并重理念及程序正义原则为指导,强调对物调查之财产保全价值;检察机关应成为财产保全及实体处分的决定主体,加强检察权对监察权的制衡与监督;细化和完善利害关系人之程序性权利,构建以检察机关为主体的程序救济机制。     

“民间反扒”的法律解读

“民间反扒联盟”是近几年在全国一些大中城市兴起的一种民间公益性组织。它的诞生和发展在一定程度上可以威慑和遏制城市中的各类扒窃犯罪活动,可以弘扬社会正气,彰显社会的正义力量,具有存在的合法性基础。但“民间反扒行为”也出现了许多问题,需要通过法律和制度等各种规范加以规制和引导,“民间反扒联型”要有效地开展工作和永久地持续下去,需要加强各种职业风险的防范与保障。     

Can elite corruption be a legitimate Machiavellian tool in an unruly world? The case of post-conflict Cambodia

Elite corruption may have a significant role in ending conflicts and shaping post-conflict development. This article enquires into the legitimacy accorded to such corruption. It reviews literature on post-conflict Cambodia, seeking evidence that academic commentaries, public opinion or elites themselves regard elite corruption as a legitimate Machiavellian tool for achieving other ends. Corruption has been an element of the style of government adopted by the dominant party in Cambodia, shaping both the achievement of peace and the uneven economic development that followed. Academic commentaries provide some implicit and explicit legitimation of corruption as a means to secure peace and to resist neoliberal policy settings by affording government discretionary resources and power. Meanwhile, public dissatisfaction with elite corruption appears to the most likely source of renewed violent conflict in Cambodia. How elite actors rationalise and legitimise corrupt behaviour remains poorly understood, and is deserving of more attention.     

马克思主义政治合法性观之探析

建立在历史唯物主义基础之上的马克思主义的政治合法性理论,以其独具特色的政治观、阶级观和国家观对历史上和现实中的政治存在作出了政治本体论层次的探讨,超越了以往仅仅局限于精神层面的合法性论说,真正实现了政治合法性理论的科学化和革命化。统观马克思主义的政治合法性理论,其基本观点可以从三个方面充分体现出来,即政治合法性的三个评判标准:生产力标准、民主标准和人民利益标准。     

印度食品监管法律制度研究

随着经济的发展,食品供应日益丰富,食品安全日益为人们所关注,食品安全问题也引起了世界各国政府的广泛关注。印度作为世界上第二大发展中国家,其经济发展速度和人口数量与中国非常接近,印度政府近年来在保证食品安全方面采取了一系列有效的监管措施,尤其是在2005年印度制定了《食品安全及标准法》(草案)。本文通过分析草案所确立的印度食品监管法律制度,结合我国目前食品安全法律体系存在的问题,提出完善我国食品监管法律制度的建议。     

利益博弈与体制创新：邓小平“两个大局”思想的政治社会学分析

论文以社会利益结构基本分析为工具,从我国改革进程中的利益博弈、利益整合的视角,对邓小平"两个大局"的思想涵义、所面临的挑战以及实现途径等方面进行了政治社会学的解读.     

事实的真实与非真实:法学的表达与司法的实践

将事实表达为客观真实是一种面向大众的政治表达,而表达为法律真实是一种面向法律职业者司法操作标准的专业表达。两种表达的共通性在于只追求事实之真,回避了可能的事实虚假及事实的非真实问题。但司法实践中认定的事实可能并非是完全真实的,因此产生了法学的表达与司法实践的背离。在事实认定可能并非真实的情况下,通过正当法律程序、协商与沟通以及法律论证,达到事实认定与判决的可接受性,是保障判决合法性的关键。     

Calculating and Believing: Ideological Norms in the Cradle of Utility Maximization

An individualist approach to political phenomena is not necessarily an economic approach. We can assume that beliefs and commitments as well as selfishness motivate individuals. Ideology provides a basis for individual choice for policy makers and for citizens and is as much a micro-foundation as narrow “self-interest.” Employing a “least-likely” case approach this paper shows that we can find legitimacy and norm-sensitive behavior in the cradle of utility maximization, the firm. In this paper I will lay out some puzzles found in the general areas of business, politics, and policy-making and show how the particular piece of behavior can be understood within the logic of ideological frameworks and the normative acceptability or legitimacy of actions. The purpose is more an “analytical narrative” than a systematic empirical investigation. It suggests the critical importance of examining the normative as well as the self-interest foundation of behavior. To that end, the empirical context of the discussion is provided by business social responsibility, by business participation in elections, by a snapshot of an ideologically driven political career, and by an antibusiness policy decision. The narrative moves from the generosity of business corporations, to foreign-owned corporations' political activity decisions in the host country, to Mrs. Thatcher and the median voter, and finally to the decision to abolish the slave trade.