关于加强违宪审查机制的理论思考

中国社会的现实发展和一些重大案件引起了中国体制内司法专家有关违宪审查的请求 ,这是法治进程中的一个转折点。考察现代司法审查制度的理论依据与发展经验 ,包括美国违宪审查制度的发展 ,可为我们提供重要的借鉴。中国违宪审查制度有必要坚定不移地推进制度化、程序化和司法化 ,这是维护宪法权威的必由之路。     

婚内强奸的宪法学思考

婚内强奸问题曾引起社会各界包括法学界的广泛关注和激烈争论。婚内强奸的实质是宪法中的性权利和民法中的配偶权之间的权利冲突。具体案件中，委任法官通过宪法利益衡量的方法来判断婚内强奸中的罪与非罪，是解决婚内强奸的有效路径。     

中世纪英国陪审团制度成因探究

中世纪英国诉讼制度的根本变迁是陪审团制度在王室巡回法庭的建立。伴随王室巡回法庭在整个司法组织体系中主导地位的确立,陪审团成为关涉自由人诉讼的主要审判组织形式。通过考察中世纪英国社会各阶层的之间博弈、民众认知理性的发展等因素对审判组织形式变迁的影响,探析英国陪审团制度形成的基本动力要素,为我国的司法制度改革提供一些理性的思考。     

谈现代科技的发展与宪法(学)的关系

现代科技发展十分迅猛,对宪法和宪法学都带来了深刻的影响。文章两位作者就现代科技发展对宪法(学)发展的贡献,现代科技发展对宪法(学)的冲击和挑战,特别是器官移植与生命权、克隆人与宪法价值、基因检测与公民的平等权、信息传播与公民的隐私权、因特网技术与宪政体制和基本权利等问题展开了讨论。宪法(学)也不是消极地应对科技的发展,而是积极地回应,一方面给现代科技的发展提供支持,另一方面也为限制现代科技发展的负面效应提出有效的对策。现代科技的发展应该回归到宪法的价值体制之内。     

全国人大常委会在宪法实施中的创制行为及其界限——以“辽宁贿选案”为例

“辽宁贿选案”发生后,该省人大常委会无法正常开会履职。对此,全国人大常委会决定成立辽宁省十二届人大七次会议筹备组,代行该省人大常委会的部分职权。这被认为是宪法上的创制性安排。全国人大常委会的创制超出了宪法文本,不是宪法解释行为,也不是宪法续造行为,而是宪法建造行为。政治主体在面对宪法僵局时主动实施宪法,建造出民主集中制原则的具体内容和人民代表大会制度的新内涵,有效解决僵局并发展宪法。这并非孤例。全国人大常委会还曾在“总理辞职案”中进行过创制。创制需要符合一定的条件,前提是出现了必须创制的环境、没有可直接适用的宪法规则,方法是按照法定程序作出政治选择,形式是发布决定而非立法。创制具有宪法法律界限和合理性界限。政治主体要选择恰当的宪法原则和制度进行创制,所创制的内容要符合比例原则。创制是全国人大常委会掌握的一种新宪法工具,表明我国宪法实施具有政治主体与宪法互动的特征。     

The Place for Custody Evaluations in Family Peacemaking

Custody evaluations can serve the dual purpose of providing neutral, objective information to the court while also contributing to the possibility of earlier settlement, which coincides with the therapeutic jurisprudence goal of more positive outcomes for children and families. Research suggests that most cases settle after custody evaluations. However, most of the literature is focused on the use of custody evaluations for litigation. Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health consultants can influence parents to focus more on children's needs and less on their conflict as they go through the evaluation process. This article urges family courts to develop processes and require professionals to learn skills needed for an interdisciplinary process to utilize evaluations in peacemaking.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• All custody evaluation processes should aim to reduce and/or shorten children's exposure to parental conflict.
• Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health professional consultants should use the evaluation process to influence parents to be more aware of their children's needs and less invested in their adversarial positions.
• Evaluators should learn to write and orally present information and state opinions with consideration of the parents themselves as consumers of the custody evaluation as well as the court.
• Attorneys and mental health professional consultants should help clients review the report, process their emotional reactions, and consider their options for settlement versus litigation in terms of emotional and financial costs to the family.
• Court processes should be developed to contain the time and cost of custody evaluations and provide dispute resolution after custody evaluations.

     

Family Peacemaking with an Interdisciplinary Team: A Therapist's Perspective

Interdisciplinary teams provide an unparalleled opportunity for peacemaking in families within the consensual dispute resolution continuum. This interdisciplinary environment was born out of the integration of Collaborative Law, in which lawyers limit the scope of their services to settlement by way of a signed agreement, and Collaborative Divorce, a team approach to divorce services that includes a lawyer for each party along with a Collaborative Divorce Coach for each party, a neutral financial specialist, and a neutral child specialist. Taken together, Interdisciplinary Collaborative Practice supports the resolution of legal issues out of court as well as addressing any emotional, relational, or behavioral problems that create obstacles to the successful resolution of the separation process.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Collaborative Practice creates legal representation in a consensual environment limiting services to settlement negotiations by way of a written agreement.
• The International Academy of Collaborative Professionals includes 5,000 members in twenty‐five countries.
• Legal representation in a consensual environment together with interdisciplinary teams create endless possibilities for dispute resolution processes.
• Collaborative Lawyers, Collaborative Divorce Coaches, child specialists, and financial specialists can create custom‐fit interdisciplinary teams that work together out of court to support families through marital transition.
• Interdisciplinary teams are family centric, bridging appropriate disciplines and resources to the needs of the family to address the vast majority of divorce‐related problems.
• Divorcing families are moving targets, learning and evolving through the process.
• Therapeutic teams support families with more complex relational, emotional, and mental health problems to find resolutions out of court.
• Divorce is a mainstream event in Western culture; we need supportive processes to encourage the best possible outcomes for all family members, especially the children.

     

An Italian Leitmotiv? Corruption and Competence in the Debates of the Italian Chamber of Deputies (1946–2014)

By making use of an original data-set built based on a codification of all investiture debates of the Italian governments from 1946 to 2014, the paper investigates the main factors that explain the choice of a party to devote its attention to the valence issues of corruption and competence in its legislative speeches. Two classes of hypotheses are tested; the first concentrates on spatial reasons, and the second concentrates on contextual factors. Both sets of factors appear to play a significant role, although no clear temporal trend emerges in party attention over almost seventy years of Italian parliamentary debates.     

日本知识产权高等法院研究

知识产权高等法院的设立是日本“知识产权立国”政策最大的亮点,其主要目的是建立技术类知识产权案件二审的专门法院,并设立了大合议、法院调查员和专门委员制度。由于特许厅在专利的数量控制上占优势,故特许厅的审判前置在确保专门性这一点上仍具有独立的价值。另一方面,知识产权高等法院为实现多元集中化进行了各种尝试,然而该尝试时常受到大合议的干扰,因此需要避免大合议过早干预,同时须处理好知识产权高等法院与最高法院的关系,形成良好的运行机制。     

改变美国警察执法的三大案例

与罗马 -日耳曼法系相比 ,普通法系更注重程序公正。马菩诉俄亥俄州、米兰达诉亚利桑那州、泰瑞诉俄亥俄州是 1 960年代美国最高法院有关警察执法的三大案例 ,它们分别确立的排除规则、米兰达警告、滞留与搜拍的权限对美国警察执法产生了重大影响 ,促进了美国警察制度的改革 ,有力地保障了公民的人权。