监督行政对权利的影响——以《行政诉讼法》第1条为基础的解释学展开

从实质性解决行政争议的角度来考察,不难发现脱离诉讼请求的合法性审查,理论上无法构建体系化的诉讼模式,实务上也充斥着程序空转的“陪跑”悖论。昔时掺杂浓厚司法与行政两权对抗的司法审查技术,可以尝试以请求权基础来构建一套较为统一与温和的行政诉讼法体系,即对以《行政诉讼法》第1条为起始的诉讼目的进行全新的解释学阐微。相对弱化而非否定合法性审查作为诉讼要件的地位,将诉讼请求作为一独立的诉讼标的予以分析,可消解监督行政异化为权力衡平之术的质变,亦定分止争而尘埃落定。与第1条休戚相关的第2条与第12条也应做出相应解读,前述两条中的“认为”句式表征了此处应一致解释为原告的诉讼理由,或者是第49条所指明的拥有具体诉讼请求的表现。而第6条可限缩解释为与诉讼请求有关的行政行为的合法性问题。诉讼请求框定了案件审理范围,是诉讼类型化的依据,对行政行为的审查根源于此、受制于此,而不是来自监督行政的需要。以请求权基础为核心的纠纷解决模式可容纳司法审查的裁判模式来直面争议,促进实现案结事了的诉讼新格局。     

关于我国纠纷解决机制的思考

面对当前我国纠纷和矛盾激化的现实,必须在充分认识到纠纷的不可避免性和适度纠纷的积极作用的基础上,致力于构建公平、合理的纠纷解决机制,努力使所有的社会纠纷和矛盾都有正式的解决途径。纠纷解决机制必须符合基本要求和标准,并贯彻司法最终原则,同时重视协商、调解方法。     

美国ADR对中国纠纷解决资源利用的启示

纠纷解决资源的利用效率直接决定了纠纷解决效率的高低。在我国 ,由于纠纷解决资源利用效率低下 ,致使大量纠纷无法得到及时有效解决。与此相反 ,美国在类似的“诉讼大爆炸”的压力下 ,却通过大力发展ADR ,成功地缓解了法院压力 ,提高了纠纷解决效率。“他山之石 ,可以攻玉” ,分析美国ADR的兴起原因 ,探讨其发展中暴露的不足 ,将对我国纠纷解决资源的利用提供有益启示     

国际法院裁决:柏威夏寺问题的终结?

根据柬埔寨的要求,2013年11月11日,海牙国际法院对柏威夏寺周边地区的领土纠纷作出判决,使柏威夏寺问题再次成为热点。尽管国际法院的裁决已经出来,但该问题似乎并未获得彻底解决,该问题依然是两国人民十分关注的热点,且对两国之间的关系有比较大的影响。在对该问题隐藏的若干因素进行分析后,本文认为该问题未能彻底解决的原因包括两国人民的思想差异、过度民族主义及国内政治斗争等因素。     

Association for Conflict Resolution Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordinators

On November 6, 2014, the AFCC Board of Directors endorsed the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination, including ethical principles for Eldercaring Coordinators, training protocols, and court pilot project template. The collaboration between Task Forces created by ACR and the Florida Chapter of AFCC, composed of twenty U.S./Canadian and twenty Florida‐wide organizations, produced both an overarching guide to assist in the development of programs and a more detailed model addressing state/province‐specific needs and characteristics. Eldercaring coordination is a dispute resolution option specifically for high‐conflict cases involving the care, needs, and safety of elders.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• There are currently no dispute resolution options for parties involved in high‐conflict cases regarding the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination address the discrepancies between dispute resolution options available for parents in conflict regarding their minor children and mature families with unresolved concerns about the care, needs, and safety of an elder.
• The ACR Guidelines for Eldercaring Coordination provide information regarding the ethical practice of eldercaring coordination including a specific definition, recommended qualifications, ethical practices, grievance procedures, training protocols, and a court pilot project template.
• The practice of eldercaring coordination will address the influx of court cases expected as baby boomers continue to age, reducing delays in court hearings, as parties will have the opportunity to resolve their concerns without continuous court attention.
• As of June 2015, five states began Pilot Projects on Eldercaring Coordination, which will be studied by an independent research group to enhance the progress of the process and to develop the best practices for initiating the programs elsewhere.

     

反思医疗纠纷处理中的司法介入

在《医疗事故处理办法》时代,主要由行政机关以此为依据处理医疗纠纷,司法一般不予介入;《医疗事故处理条例》颁布后,司法介入医疗纠纷处理力度不断加大,表现为举证责任的规定,以及处理依据上,主要或全部以《民法通则》处理医疗纠纷,《医疗事故处理条例》已被实际上架空。本文分析了出现此种情形的原因,并指出当前处理机制中存在的不足,并进一步对医疗纠纷的处理提出建议。     

Book Review: Divorced From Reality: Rethinking Family Dispute Resolution by Jane C. Murphy and Jana B. Singer

This essay summarizes key points from the book and observes the very different players and processes involved when families in poverty enter the family court system.     

迈向“过程导向信任”的刑事死因鉴定争议解决机制

中国当今刑事鉴定争议频发。其中当事人与办案机关鉴定冲突最剧烈、不满手段最多样,且其社会影响最大者,目前主要聚集在部分死因鉴定领域。该类鉴定争议既滋生过度重复鉴定,更促使部分当事人上访、闹事,一度还以此衍生出暴力性群体事件。死因鉴定争议的发生,主要源于影响鉴定意见可信性的一系列因素,而非仅因为、甚或主要基于鉴定意见的客观可靠性。因此,为重塑中国刑事死因鉴定的公信力,必须走向从实践出发的法律研究与制度建构立场,以回应办案部门创建、并亟须理论提炼与立法改良的“过程导向信任”的鉴定争议解决机制。其关键措施,是通过死因鉴定程序的开放性与当事人双方（包括其聘请的法医专家）的充分参与性,从而实现鉴定意见的可信性或当事人可接受性;并以此领域的鉴定争议解决为突破口,进行鉴定制度改革,以提升中国整个刑事司法鉴定的公信力与可信性。