论法院对基本权利的保护

为公民基本权利提供保护,是现代国家合法性的重要来源。普通法院在基本权利保护中发挥着重要作用。德国虽然设立了宪法法院,但保护公民基本权利的职责仍主要由其他法院承担。在没有设立宪法法院的国家,通过普通法院更是为基本权利提供司法保护的唯一途径。我国法院应当通过三种方式为基本权利提供司法保护:如果法律有保护基本权利的具体规定,法院应当直接适用法律;如果法律对基本权利的保护只作了抽象规定,法院应当对有关抽象立法进行合宪解释之后予以适用;如果法律没有作出保护基本权利的任何规定,法院可以直接适用宪法的基本权利条款。     

晚清领事保护的发展及其局限

对于领事保护的推动,就融合有政治与人权双重因素。当然,这一双重因素的影响又是随着历史的发展而有所不同的。尽管世界最早的领事保护实践可以追溯至古希腊城邦时期,而中国最早的领事保护实践却只能追溯至晚清时期。当时的清政府迫于内外压力,逐步转变对华侨的"叛民"、"罪民"和"弃民"等观念,从而展开了"立约保护"、"领事机关的调查与交涉"等形式(甚至还包括军舰巡航等军事方式)的领事保护。晚清政府领事保护的发展是与其华侨观念及政策的转变密切相关的。清政府华侨政策和领事保护的变化,根本上还是以巩固和发展清朝的统治为出发点的,政治因素在其中居于主导地位。这也就是"家国一体"型国家的局限性所在。     

La protección de los derechos fundamentales del deportista en la lucha contra el dopaje. Una visión desde el ordenamiento jurídico español

Doping is addressed in this paper from two different scopes: on one hand, the legal regulations for prevention and repression are studied; on the other hand, the clash between the anti-doping control mechanism and a fundamental right such as the athlete's privacy is noted. We start from the irrefutable fact that “awareness against doping” is practically universal. The enactment of this law was a milestone in the history of the fight against doping in the Spanish regulation. However, the problem arises when the anti-doping legislation worldwide and in Spain, which enables some healthcare professionals and other people involved, to carry out several anti-doping operations that may conflict with the athlete's fundamental right to privacy, all of this in a context of strong media and social impact. For this reason, it is pertinent to raise the issue if one of these operations, such as the duty of permanent localization, is sufficiently justified in terms of protecting the sportsperson's health.     

《环境保护法》的前世今生

修订后的《中华人民共和国环境保护法》将于2015年1月1日开始实施,这部法律的前身是1979年《环境保护法（试行）》,基础是1989年颁行的《环境保护法》。1979年的《环境保护法（试行）》虽然不是此次修法的直接文本,但其作为中国第一部环境保护领域的综合性法律,在奠定中国环境保护法律制度体系基础的同时,也为后来留下了一些隐患,成为此次修法的争论的起因。1989年的《环境保护法》是此次修改的直接文本,这部法律的存废之争一直持续了20多年;在2011年年初人大常委会正式启动修法程序后,经历全国人大常委会四次审议、修改草案两次面向社会公开征求意见、从＂修正案＂到＂修订案＂,创造了中国立法史上几个＂第一＂。最终通过的《环境保护法修订案》体现了十八届三中全会提出的建设生态文明,建立最严格制度的要求,确立了其在环境保护领域的基础性、综合性法律的地位,在建立生态环境保护法律机制方面实现了重大突破。     

《职务发明条例》：必要之善抑或非必要之恶？

制定《职务发明条例》在宏观和微观两个层面均不具备现实必要性.在借鉴国外立法例的时候,《职务发明条例草案》存在法律依据异质与借鉴过时国外立法例的瑕疵.颁行《职务发明条例》有可能导致过度的政府规制,以及导致企业商业秘密泄露、额外增加企业经营成本、引发“多任务委托—代理问题”和收入分配不公等其他问题.     

美国联邦政府的煤矿安全生产监管制度研究

中美两国都是世界上最主的煤炭生产国和消费国.但是,两国的煤矿安全状况却存在较大差异.除了煤炭产业结构、技术水平和资源禀赋等因素之外,煤矿安全监管法治建设也是导致这一差异的重原因.美国煤矿安全生产立法经历多轮修订,不断纠正历次重大煤矿事故暴露出的监管缺陷,建立起独立高效的煤矿安全监管体系,完善煤矿安全监察和事故调查程序,优化了法律责任和执法机制.此外,煤矿安全监察员和煤矿从业人员的强制培训制度,也可以有效加强监管机构的监管能力和监管对象的合规水平.而美国矿山安全和健康委员会独立负责的行政复议,有效保障了对行政执法行为的纠错和对相对人的救济功能.这些经验值得中国参考借鉴.     

Default entitlements in personal data in the proposed Regulation: Informational self-determination off the table … and back on again?

This paper aims to assess the proposed General Data Protection Regulation through the framework of default entitlements in personal data. The notion of default entitlements comes from economic analysis of law and provides new insights into the implications of the data protection reform. While, under the principle of informational self-determination the default entitlements should lie with the individual, the Commission is shown to assign a great deal of default rights to others, including the Information Industry. This article cautions against the possibility of reducing the European system of data protection rooted in the values of individual autonomy and informational self-determination to a mere set of administrative rules channelling the flow of personal data, yet without a clear direction.     

Rethinking the one-stop-shop mechanism: Legal certainty and legitimate expectation

This paper aims to contribute to the discussion concerning the one-stop-shop mechanism proposed in the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter “GDPR”). The choice of regulation as the instrument to legislate on data protection is already an unmistakable indication that unification and simplification (together with respect of data subjects' interests) shall be the guide for every legal discussion on the matter. The one-stop-shop mechanism (hereinafter “OSS”) clearly reflects the unification and simplification which the reform aims for. We believe that OSS is logically connected with the idea of one Data Protection Authority (hereinafter “DPA”) with an exclusive jurisdiction and that this can only mean that, given one controller, no other DPA can be a competent authority.² In other words, OSS implies a single and comprehensive competent authority of a given controller. In our analysis we argue that such architecture: a) works well with the “consistency mechanism”; b) provides guarantees to data subjects for a clear allocation of powers (legal certainty); and c) is not at odds with the complaint lodging procedure. Our position on fundamental questions is as follows. What is the perimeter of competence of the DPA in charge? We believe that it should have enforcement power on every issue of the controller, including issuing the fines. How to reconcile such dominant role of one DPA with the principle of co-operation among DPAs? We do not consider co-operation at odds with the rule that decisions are taken by just one single authority. Finally, we share some suggestions on how to make the jurisdiction allocation mechanism (the main establishment criterion) more straightforward.     

中国(上海)自由贸易试验区知识产权保护研究

中国(上海)自由贸易试验区的建立对推进国内改革与世界市场开放具有里程碑式的意义。我国的自由贸易试验区属于自由贸易园区(FTZ),不同于自由贸易协定下的自由贸易区(FTA),也不同于传统保税区,具有"境内关外"和"一线放开、二线管住"的特征。自由贸易试验区的贸易便利化举措必然使其成为知识产权侵权避风港的可能性急剧上升。但由于相应制度的缺失和认识的偏差,自由贸易试验区可能成为知识产权海关执法的模糊区甚至空白区,同时我国目前的知识产权保护体系与自由贸易试验区寻求的便捷、高效的知识产权市场监管模式和纠纷解决机制相距甚远。从相关国际条约的立法和国内外自由贸易园区的实践来看,在自由贸易园区内实施更加严格的知识产权保护是现在和未来国际知识产权保护的必然趋势。因此,在自由贸易试验区内应加强知识产权海关保护、建立知识产权市场监管体系、完善知识产权纠纷解决机制。     

各利益相关者在医院与社区双向转诊合作中的责任与机制简

针对目前双向转诊中信息不能共享、药品获得和费用报销障碍、社区人力服务水平相对较差等问题,从双向转诊中各利益相关者角度分析在双向转诊实施过程中政府、医疗机构（医院与社区卫生服务机构）、患者与家属各自应当承担的责任,提出相应的措施及改进机制。