Britain and Europe: An Unforgettable Past and an Unavoidable Future

The title of this article is taken from the opening lines of Hugo Young's brilliant history of Britain's relationship with Europe, This Blessed Plot . That book begins with a sentence that says it all: 'This is the story of 50 years in which Britain struggled to reconcile the past she could not forget with the future she could not avoid.' Those words were written in the spring of 1998. Despite the early promise of Tony Blair's European policy, little has changed since. For France and Germany, the institutions of Europe represent a uniquely successful attempt to exorcise the past. For its part, Britain lives in the shadow of its history.
The struggle to reconcile national identity with strategic interests is as acute as it has ever been. For all that Mr Blair's government has done something in recent years to make Britain's case in Europe, it has failed to make Europe's case in Britain.     

PUBLIC OPINION REACTION TO REPEATED EVENTS: Citizen Response to Multiple Supreme Court Abortion Decisions

While numerous works explores how single events or political actions affect public opinion, almost no research explores how this effect evolves with repeated actions. The Conditional Response Model holds that while elite actors can influence and polarize the public when they first act on an issue, subsequent action will not have this same effect. We challenge this model based on its depiction of psychological models of attitude formation and change. Instead of focusing on the number of times an actor has addressed an issue, we argue that the state of public opinion is the key to determining how the public will react to multiple elite actions over a long timeframe. We examine how the public reacted to multiple Supreme Court decisions on abortion. Our results suggest that the Conditional Response Model does a poor job of depicting public opinion and that actors are not limited in their influence by the number of previous actions on an issue.     

海牙《协议选择法院公约》对中国国际私法立法的启示

海牙《协议选择法院公约》作为国际范围内统一民事管辖权和外国判决的承认与执行的重要成果,建立了“排他性法院选择协议”的管辖权模式,采用了新的“国际性案件”划分标准,鼓励选择诉讼作为解决争议的方式,针对被请求国承认和执行惩罚性赔偿判决问题达成了妥协,为中国国际私法立法,特别是《民事诉讼法》的修订具有重大启示。     

Supreme Court Legitimacy and Group-Centric Forces: Black Support for Capital Punishment and Affirmative Action

The Supreme Court has addressed capital punishment and affirmative action many times and, as a result, has had sweeping policymaking effects. For that reason, we argue that black opinion on capital punishment and affirmative action will be shaped by diffuse support for the Court. We also recognize the important role of group-centric forces in shaping black opinion. We find that diffuse support for the Court leads blacks with lower levels of race consciousness to be more supportive of capital punishment and less supportive of affirmative action, positions in line with the Court's decisions on these issues but contrary to black interests. The Court, however, is not able to throw its cloak of legitimacy around its policy position for blacks with the highest levels of group consciousness.     

论国家实施国际犯罪的责任

国家实施国际犯罪需要承担相应责任,在国家犯罪中起直接作用的具体人员必须承担个人责任。适用于个人的刑罚已由《国际刑事法院罗马规约》作出规定,而针对国家这一抽象实体的责任形式应是集法律、政治、道义和经济为一体的混合处罚措施。国际刑事法院在追究国家罪责的司法活动中需要加强与联合国安理会的合作,且得到世界各国的大力支持,这样才能对国家作出限制主权、罚金、经济制裁等处罚措施并实际执行。     

司法赔偿中确认程序之检讨及前瞻

在我国《国家赔偿法》中,确认程序是赔偿请求人获得司法赔偿的必经程序,然而由于现行的司法赔偿的确认程序存在着主体中立性不足、确认期限缺省、确认标准模糊、确认救济途径单一等诸多不足,使得确认程序遭致广泛的批评。对待确认程序的理性态度是揭示出其生成的宪政体制因素,并以此为基础将现行司法赔偿确认程序设计成可选择的程序,并在人大中设立最终处理机关。     

论宪政模式选择中的本土文化传统因素

随着我国民主宪政制度的发展和宪政观念的不断深入人心,宪政模式的选择问题也越来越为人们所关注。而在这个问题上,本土文化传统因素的影响至关重要。西方国家与近代中国宪政的发展历史证明,本土固有的文化传统及其特异性,直接决定了宪政发生与发展的道路,以及宪政模式的基本特征。因此中国要选择符合自己国情的宪政模式,构建有中国特色的民主宪政制度,首先必须对本土文化传统因素及其影响问题有一个清楚的认识。     

论司法改革的理论基础及方向

目前的司法改革理论是以立法、行政和司法三权分立为背景展开的 ,其所提出的方案不能解决人民代表大会制度下的“司法”公正问题。建立宪法审判制度 ,设立全国人大宪法委员会 ,把人大的个案监督变成宪法诉讼 ,是解决问题的基本方向。     

论宪法的自由理念

宪法的自由理念有其肯定和否定双重形态,这两种不同的形态产生出宪法与宪政具体理念, 即肯定性自由理念建构起宪法的人民主权理念, 否定性自由理念建构起宪法的权利保障和权力制约理念, 自由的双重形态建构起公共政治领域和私人领域的界分。一部实质宪法应当从实质到规范都能体现其自由理念, 即对基本自由权利和其他剩余权利的保障以及对国家权力的限制。     

对民事诉讼法律关系若干问题的再思考

民事诉讼法律关系不仅是指法院与一切诉讼参与人之间,而且也是当 事人彼此之间以及当事人与其他诉讼参与人之间的诉讼权利义务关系;而区分诉讼 法律关系主体和诉讼主体概念的外延和界定其内涵,更易准确把握二者质的规定性、 把握其之于民事诉讼的不同意义。同时,树立法院与当事人在民事诉讼法律关系中 的地位平等的观念,并恰当理解和把握法院在民事诉讼法律关系中的主导地位,将对 更为合理地配置诉讼主体及其彼此之间的诉讼权利义务和更为科学地设置诉讼结构 大有裨益。