试述执法过错责任追究制度

当前,公安机关执法过错责任追究制度中错案范围界定方面存在一些问题,该制度的激励作用也给法律的基本原则、运作带来一定的冲击,其程序中也存在一些问题.故此,要充分完善该项制度,以发挥其应有的作用.     

法院调解的回归与发展路径解析——永登县人民法院调解工作引发的思考

法院调解作为诉讼的解决方式,走过了一条＂否定之否定＂的道路。法院重新重视调解工作,是对于调解在新的历史时期独特价值有了新的发掘,是诉讼的本质规律和诉讼调解的优势共同作用的必然结果。对于＂东方经验＂的承扬和发展,是法院对于本土司法规律有了更深、更全的认识,同时也表明了建设法治社会的美好愿望离不开中国现实的法治发展水平。     

行政调解的制度设计

目前的行政调解制度存在层次不齐、随机设置、内容简单、对象含混、原则、方法、标准及条件不清晰等缺陷,应当加以改进。行政调解制度的设计包括五个方面:扩大调解范围;增加第三部门为调解组织;明确自愿自治、合法合理等调解的原则;丰富调解方法;完善调解程序。     

从一起撤销仲裁裁决案看我国司法监督的范围

在仲裁司法监督范围这一问题上,理论界一向有争议。通过对东莞市中级人民法院一起裁定驳回申请撤销仲裁裁决案例的分析,可以看出,司法实践中,已经将程序问题作为司法对仲裁的主要监督范围,将司法审查范围限于程序性审查有助于保障仲裁的独立性和自治性。因此,删除现行法律关于仲裁实体审查的规定,既符合国际惯例,也有助于促进我国仲裁事业的发展。     

澳大利亚ADR的发展与启示(上)

ADR是澳大利亚纠纷解决的重要机制之一。以行业、社区为基础的ADR以及司法ADR的发达是澳大利亚ADR的两大特征。诉讼理念的转变、诉讼程序的改革与案件管理制度促进了澳大利亚ADR的发展。在ADR与诉讼机制的协调以及对ADR的规范化方面,澳大利亚有值得我国借鉴之处。     

作为一个偶然地区性事件的正当程序革命

沃伦1953年被任命为美国联邦最高法院大法官是一个普通的政治任命。正当程序革命是一个意外进入的时代。沃伦法院成员都是普通公民,而绝非圣贤。在美国深深的卷入越战的大背景下,美国国内兴起了浩大的民权运动。沃伦法院在刑事领域的正当程序革命和当时的时势互相借力,将六十年代演化为一个革命时代。中国刑事诉讼改革以正当程序革命为精神激励,圣化沃伦革命,意在矫枉过正,但可能带来逆向的反弹。     

《联合国反腐败公约》与我国侦查程序的改革研究

在全球化趋势和法制现代化的背景下,我国侦查程序在程序保障与司法效率、打击犯罪和保障人权、追求真实与司法成本等方面都暴露出诸多问题,重新审视和改革势在必行。随着我国加入《联合国反腐败公约》,未来的侦查改革必须从更广阔的视野出发,改革侦查程序,推进侦查法治化,加强侦查能力建设。我国侦查程序的改革应当坚持“惩罚犯罪与保障人权并重”的原则。侦查程序改革所要达到的目标,既包括合理约束侦查权,又必须有效保障人权。     

收回死刑复核权面临的难题及其破解

It is of great significance for the Supreme Court of China (SCC) to take back the power of having judicial review for death sentences. For that purpose, first, we have to amend the procedures for judicial review for death sentences, including precisely defining the responsibility of the SCC to review death sentences, determining appropriate modes of review, prescribing the time limit of review, allowing the participation of defense lawyers and prosecutors, etc. Second, we must also amend the appellate procedures for capital cases, including holding hearings, comprehensive trial of key cases, and adjusting the time limit for the second instance. Third, we must improve relative systems that can directly affect the trial quality of capital cases, including the improvement of evidentiary rules, the reform of judicial committees, and the forbiddance to change an original sentence into a death sentence. Long Zongzhi, professor, chairs the academic commission at Southwestern University of Politics and Law. Meanwhile, he takes the vice chair of the supervising committee of legal education in the Ministry of Education of China. He advanced the theory of dual structure of criminal litigation in early 1990s and put forward the theory of relative reasonableness in late 1990s, which exerted great influence in academic law. Moreover, he has published a great number of works on criminal litigation, judicial system, and evidence law.     

扣押程序的基本原则研究

通过对扣押程序的基本原则进行系统理论研究，从而将保障人权的理念贯穿于扣押程序中，解决扣押程序中存在的理论难题，规范扣押程序的执行，使扣押程序成为一种稳定有序、符合合法性、正当性原则的强制性措施。     

Race-Based Peremptory Challenges: An Empirical Analysis of Litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2002–2006

This paper examines race-based peremptory challenges. Such challenges occur during the voir dire jury selection process. The process allows both the defense and the prosecution to strike jurors who they believe will not decide cases fairly. However, in the case of Batson v. Kentucky 476 U.S. 79 (1986), the Supreme Court ruled that race could not be used as a factor in eliminating prospective jurors. This paper examines federal litigation for five years in which it was alleged that race was used as a factor in removing a juror. An examination of the cases revealed that most of the cases involved sole male litigants who allege that there were multiple race-based peremptory challenges used in their cases. Moreover, most of the cases that led to the allegations involved violent offenses. Other case characteristics are noted, but of most significance was the finding that most appellants lost their cases. As such, the courts felt that most of the challenges were, in fact, race neutral. The implications of this research are discussed. This study was funded by an undergraduate research grant from Penn State University.