党内和谐：实现社会和谐的突破口

以党内和谐促进社会和谐是党的十六届六中全会提出的新思路。利益格局变化、价值取向多元化和制度不完善,是影响党内和谐的主要原因。实现党内和谐的基本思路是加强利益整合、推进制度创新、加强理论武装和完善领导方式与执政方式。     

政府信息公开中“内部管理信息”的判定

内部管理信息不予公开在国务院办公厅《关于做好政府信息依申请公开工作的意见》中进行规定后,法院通过个案对如何判定内部管理信息进行了回应。通过判决梳理,可见法官在审查时关注到内部管理信息的主体、内容、程序和效力四个方面;其中"不具备外部效力"作为效力标准是法院判定内部管理信息的主要考察因素。然而针对现行规范的梳理却显示出不同的结论,信息所涉内容的"内部性"方是内部管理信息的核心,即在行政机关"履行职责"之外,属于"日常工作"中的内部管理事务;同时部门、地方性信息公开规范通过列举式规定,将人事信息、设备管理信息、内部规章制度列为内部管理信息的典型类别。以"内部性事务"作为内容标准判定内部管理信息相较于"不具备外部效力"作为效力标准而言,更符合立法原意且契合已有的规范体系。     

Analyzing approaches to internet jurisdiction based on a model of harbors and the high seas

The inherent cross-border nature of the internet has challenged the legal system for over two decades. In this paper we introduce a model in which the internet is approached as if it were the high seas, the harbor of origin, the harbor of destination, or a combination of these. This model is used to rephrase existing case law related to internet jurisdiction from an international law perspective, the US and the EU (in particular Germany and the Netherlands). The model helps to illuminate the positions taken by the parties and the judge, and to indicate possible alternative interpretations. In some cases a high seas approach would have made sense (Yahoo!), or more recently the Vacation Rental by Owner case about trademarks where registration in one country was deemed to have an effect everywhere a person had the trademark on his or her computer screen. In H&M v G-star the Dutch Supreme Court even established jurisdiction based on an infringing product that was not available in the city of the court but was to become available on the internet some time in the future. We do not take a position in this paper on what perspective, based on our model, is best, but make clear how to identify the possible arguments.     

The Politics of Civil Service and Administrative Reforms in Development—Explaining Within‐Country Variation of Reform Outcomes in Georgia after the Rose Revolution

This article examines the role of politics as a determinant of civil service and administrative (CSA) reform outcomes in Georgia. The majority of existing studies on CSA reforms face several methodological challenges, which make it difficult to understand the influence of politics in more detail. Based on literature review findings, the article proposes a model for within‐country comparisons that allows one to control for a number of variables such as context and policy design. Comparing CSA reform outcomes in the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs in Georgia after the 2003 Rose Revolution through a matched case study, the article shows that certain countrywide legal adjustments, anti‐corruption measures and context variables are necessary but insufficient conditions for successful reform. While in general Georgia has achieved considerable success in its CSA reform efforts, the President's leverage over reform implementation, leadership at the ministry level and the politics of foreign aid have led to significant variation in reform outcomes across the analysed institutions. In addition to this, institutional constraints reflecting inherent differences between policy sectors explain another part of the variation in outcomes in Georgia. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

谈确定检察机关对渎职罪“原案”拥有管辖权的必要性

渎职罪“原案”是查处渎职罪的前提和基础,没有“原案”也就无所谓有渎职罪的存在,“原案”的存在与否,对检察机关启动法律程序对国家机关工作人员的渎职犯罪行为进行检察有至关重要的作用。但《刑诉法》修改后,检察机关对查处渎职罪案件涉及的其它刑事案件即“原案”没有管辖权,使检察机关在查处渎职侵权案件工作中遇到了前所未有的困难,从检察机关法律监督职能看,应赋予检察机关对渎职罪“原案”的管辖权。检察机关的法律监督职能是通过行使多种具体的检察权来实现的,对国家机关工作人员渎职犯罪行为行使侦查权是行使法律监督职能的一种具体体现,为了充分实现这种职能,法律应赋予检察机关在查处渎职罪过程中涉及到的相关刑事案件可以行使侦查权,赋予检察机关对渎职罪“原案”的管辖权是从程序上保证检察机关查处渎职犯罪,履行好国家法律监督职能的必要手段。     

党代会常任制:政治体制改革的重要突破口

党代会常任制就是关于党代会本身如何"常任"的一系列制度和程序。由于党代会常任制对党内民主发展来讲具有实质性、联动性、风险较小的特点,所以党代会常任制是发展党内民主的突破口。由于"党内民主是人民民主的推动和引导力量,人民民主的发展有助于权力过分集中的政治体制的改革;党内民主是消除权力过分集中的政治体制弊端的有力武器;以党内民主带动政治体制改革风险小、成本低",所以党内民主是我国政治体制改革的突破口。由此,从逻辑推演的视角看:党代会常任制是我国政治体制改革最为重要的突破口。     

Protecting Ohio's Children: Ohio Juvenile Court Jurisdiction to Prevent Nonparty Interference in the Protection of the Best Interest of a Child

Ohio Rule of Juvenile Procedure 2(Y) allows juvenile courts to do what other courts cannot: designate additional parties to an action, allowing juvenile courts to better accomplish their statutory purpose of pursuing the best interests of children. However, sometimes this can lead to confusion about juvenile courts’ actions to protect children, especially when courts invoke Rule 2(Y) to stop interference with proceedings. This article will examine the historical foundations of Ohio's juvenile courts, the unique authority that they possess, and the conflicts that can arise due to interference with juvenile court proceedings. Ohio's juvenile courts have unique authority, and they can use that authority in a way that does not conflict with constitutional rights, while still working to protect the interests of children.     

Space,scale and jurisdiction in health service provision for drug users: the legal geography of a supervised injecting facility

Sydney's Medically Supervised Injecting Centre delivers the significant benefits of harm reduction, but has been controversial regards the law. Its contested history is examined here through the lens of legal geography. Narrative analysis reveals that the arguments for and against the centre's establishment referenced matters ranging from international treaties through to municipal governance. These arguments and their outcome were variously shaped by the different spaces and scales of jurisdiction but not simply in a zero sum game of law played out through the hierarchically ordered nesting of container-like territories. The implications for legal geography and for public health are discussed.     

Jurisdictional integration: A framework for measuring and predicting the depth of international regulatory cooperation in competition policy

This article takes a new approach to international regulatory cooperation by developing a concept of the depth of cooperation, jurisdictional integration. A dataset of international competition policy agreements is compiled and ranked against an ordinal index of the depth of de jure cooperation in enforcing competition policies. There has been both a deepening and broadening of de jure cooperation over time. Statistical analysis finds that common membership of the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development is a strong predictor of the depth of agreements to cooperate in enforcing competition policies; that we can be confident that the depth of agreements is low when signatories' substantive competition laws are dissimilar; and that the depth of de jure cooperation is a strong predictor of whether an agreement is “intergovernmental” or “transgovernmental.” The article puts forward a new way to map and measure international regulatory cooperation, and a new variable for use in research on its causes and consequences.     

Towards a Global Regulatory Framework for Cross-Border Data Flows—Fundamental Concerns and the China’s Approach

Cross-border data flows not only involve cross-border trade issues, but also severely challenge personal information protection, national data security, and the jurisdiction of justice and enforcement. As the current digital trade negotiations could not accommodate these challenges, China has initiated the concept of secure cross-border data flow and has launched a dual-track multi-level regulatory system, including control system for overseas transfer of important data, system of crossborder provision of personal information, and system of cross-border data request for justice and enforcement. To explore a global regulatory framework for cross-border data flows, legitimate and controllable cross-border data flows should be promoted, supervision should be categorized based on risk concerned, and the rule of law should be coordinated at home and abroad to promote system compatibility. To this end, the key is to build a compatible regulatory framework, which includes clarifying the scope of important data to define the “Negative List” for preventing national security risks, improving the cross-border accountability for protecting personal information rights and interests to ease pre-supervision pressure, and focusing on data access rights instead of data localization for upholding the jurisdiction of justice and enforcement.