论司法信息公开

司法信息公开在我国已初露端倪。建立政府信息公开制度之后实行司法信息公开,对于扩大公共信息公开的覆盖面、保障公民的民主权利、增强国家机关的透明度、促进司法廉洁、实现司法公正均具有十分重要的意义。实行司法信息公开,应当对司法信息和司法信息公开进行正确、合理的界定,慎重、周密地确定司法信息公开的范围,科学地设计司法信息公开的方式和程序,并制定切实可行的保障、救济与监督措施。     

Disclosure on Measures to Prevent Corruption Risks: A Study of Italian Local Governments

This article investigates the characteristics of the disclosures of anticorruption measures that Italian local governments (LGs) publish to increase transparency, public accountability, and citizens’ trust in public administration. The analysis of the anticorruption plans of a sample of Italian LGs shows that this type of disclosure might be a way of repairing organizational legitimacy after an occurrence of corruption. More external directors in the governing body also increase the pressure on LG managers to publish information about anticorruption measures. Finally, larger LGs demonstrate a greater propensity to provide information on the actions implemented to mitigate corruption risks.     

我国司法信息公开制度的重构、检讨与展望

司法信息公开是言论自由与新闻自由所衍生的知情权的嬗变，而知情权的充分行使，又将表达阪、参与权、监督权置于其延展线上。尽管司法信息公开已经被国际社会所认可，但在我国却与司法公开之间薛在误读与曲解。以各国司法信息公开经验为视角，司法行政信息公开、司法程序信息公开、法官信息公开是司法信息公开制度架构中的“三驾马车”。而“三驾马车”并驾齐驱才是制度的应然选择。但是，当前我国司去信息公开制度的运行仍然困难重重，尽力而为，量力而行地完善我国司法信息公开制度是我国司法权力运阡的必然进程。     

政府信息的范围辨析——由朱令案引发的思考

朱令案中的政府信息公开申请引发了学界的广泛讨论,学界对于案中申请公开的侦查信息是否适用《政府信息公开条例》以及是否应当公开的问题形成了不同的观点。这些观点首要的分歧在于朱令案中申请公开的侦查信息是否是《条例》规定的"政府信息"。无论从文义解释、目的解释还是体系解释的角度分析,朱令案中被害人申请公开的侦查信息都不是《条例》规定的"政府信息",其公开与否不适用《条例》的规定。     

论行政评价机制与参与型行政

在政府职能定位和政府职能转变过程中,建立一系列行政评价机制,完善参与型行政,是实现公共利益这一行政活动的最高目的的基本保障。在行政评价和参与型行政方面,发达国家已有诸多成功的经验和失败的教训,值得正在引进行政评价机制的中国予以关注和借鉴。确立解消信息非对称性的信息公开、信息发送机制,是实现参与型行政评价的前提条件。政府应当在履行公开信息和说明责任的同时,采取切实有效的措施,对市民参与行政评价进行技术支援,提高相关主体的“掌舵”技能,支援相关主体对公共事务的参与。要赋予行政评价更进一步巩固的地位,使其成为具有实效的制度,行政评价的法制化是首选的途径。     

Reconstructing Insurance Law: The Law Commissions' Consultation Paper

In July 2007 the English and Scottish Law Commissions published the consultation paper Insurance Law – Non-disclosure and Breach of Warranty (hereafter LCCP) which sets out in detail the Commissions' provisional proposals for the reform of insurance contract law with particular reference to the key areas of utmost good faith, warranties and agency. This article analyses, from a critical standpoint, the LCCP's principal conclusions and recommendations. It begins by noting, as a means of demonstrating that the current reform process should be informed by modern industry practices, that the ways in which modern insurance contracts are concluded differ significantly from those when insurance law was last reviewed by the Law Commission in 1980. The article then discusses the dichotomy between consumer and business insurance given that this distinction underpins the LCCP and its approach towards reforming the pre-contractual duty of good faith. By way of backdrop to the analysis, we consider the approach taken towards reforming the law governing intermediaries acting for prospective assureds during the disclosure process. Finally, the proposed rules for warranties and similar terms are examined. It is argued that the proposal to retain continuing warranties in business insurance contracts will, if implemented, represent a missed opportunity to rid insurance contracts of terms long criticised as draconian and disproportionate in their effect.     

司法何以如此尴尬——以一起医疗纠纷案件审理为例

不断增多的医疗纠纷及其引发的种种愤懑,使得各种利益纠葛、体制冲突、伦理诉求和法律管制之间形成了一种较之从前更为复杂而微妙的关系。对医患关系的社会调查显示,目前我国医患双方的关系并不融洽,双方缺乏高度的信任感,一旦患者未达到其预期的疗效,势必为双方的矛盾、冲突和纠纷埋下伏笔;医患双方在具体运用知情同意权法则时产生的强烈的错位,使得知情同意权在减少医患纠纷、构建高度信任基础上的医患和谐关系的功能大打折扣。而对实践中的一个真实案例的审理的剖析则反映出我国法律和司法在知情同意权方面是如此的苍白无力,使得知情同意法则的建立迫在眉睫。我国知情同意权法则的理想构架应该包括:知情同意权法则的基本原则,医生的告知义务,患者的同意以及违反告知义务的构成要件。     

论英国的分时度假立法

英国是欧盟成员国中最早制定分时度假专门立法的国家,欧盟分时度假指令也是在该国的推动下出台的。因此,研究英国分时度假立法,对我国将来的立法应有一定的借鉴价值。从英国分时度假法的立法背景出发,重点介绍了英国立法的内容及其重大修订,并做出相应评述。     

论民事诉讼中的证据交换制度

证据交换制度无论是对于强化诉讼公正还是提高诉讼效率都具有极其重要的作用,国外该制度司法实践的成功也表明了这一点。我国近来已用司法解释的形式在民事诉讼中创建了该项制度的雏形,但还很不完善,在效力上也值得怀疑,因而很有必要进行重构。     

Is Something Better Than Nothing? The Effect of Short Terms of Mandatory Parole Supervision

This article reports the findings of a quasi-experimental evaluation of a mandatory early parole program. New Jersey’s Statutory Early Release (SER) law required that all inmates, with few exceptions, be released onto parole six months before the expiration of their sentence. SER participants (n = 405) were matched using propensity scores to two groups of similar offenders who left prison in the year prior to the implementation of the SER statute. Comparison groups include former inmates that were released either unconditionally (n = 4,507) or onto standard parole (n = 5,657). At the conclusion of the matching routines, 395 SER-parolee pairs and 394 SER-unconditional release pairs were identified. Outcomes measures, including comparisons of rearrest and reconviction rates, are reported pre and post matching, and at 6-, 12-, and 18-month intervals. Individuals enrolled in the SER program demonstrated significantly reduced arrest rates during the SER supervision period when compared to unconditionally released offenders, though differences do not persist past six months. Offending rates for both SER participants and matched parolees were generally similar, with some significant variation in arrest rates emerging after 12 months.