简易判决的本土化探索——简易程序改革的另一种进路研究

在诉讼案件与日俱增而司法资源有限的国情下,传统的诉讼模式已无法完全满足繁简案件分流审理的需求,简易程序不简易的现实制约着当事人和法院简便快速处理简单案件的迫切要求。基层法院审判实践中存在事实无争议的案件,增设简易判决改变传统的审理方式,把这部分事实无争议案件过滤于庭审之外,进一步细化简单案件的程序再分流,可为简易程序改革提供一种全新的进路和方向。     

俄罗斯新旧《法典》非法证据排除规则比较与启示

新旧《俄罗斯联邦刑事诉讼法典》关于非法证据及其排除规则的规定存在许多差异,特别是新《法典》有了许多新的规定与发展,显示了从注重打击犯罪到保障人权与打击犯罪并重的转变,这对完善我国非法证据排除规则具有良多启示。     

仲裁员委任程序问题新探

仲裁员是仲裁的生命线,是保障仲裁公正的首要因素,而决定仲裁员素质高低的仲裁员委任制度自然成为仲裁程序框架搭建的根基。当前,仲裁员委任制度还存在相当大的发展空间,其中就委任的程序而言,核心问题在于如何在以当事人意思自治为首位的前提下,对仲裁员委任的程序推进作出一定合理的、必要的规制,以实现自治与限制这两个对立面平衡和统一。     

Patent litigation insurance and R&D incentives

A major policy concern regarding patenting activity is related to the actual enforceability of the patents granted by Patent Offices. The risk of facing elevated legal costs to defend patent rights can affect ex-ante incentives to invest in R&D. This paper analyses whether the availability of insurance policies that cover legal expenditures for patent litigation could increase the appropriability of the innovation. We model a situation in which an incumbent innovator is endowed with a valid patent and an entrant imitator can either directly enter the market or try to apply for a patent, hoping that an error will be made by the Patent Office. The incumbent can accommodate the entrant, file a suit to a civil court or offer a settlement agreement. We model the presence of heterogeneity in the risk that the patents will face an error by both patent examiners at Patent Offices and judges at civil court. We analyse the changes in expected profits for the innovator when given the possibility of buying an insurance policy which will cover legal costs in the event of trial. We compare the cases in which (i) coverage is voluntary and the insurer can discriminate perfectly between risky patents; (ii) coverage is voluntary and the insurer cannot discriminate between patents, and (iii) coverage is compulsory. The model highlights a set of peculiar strategic characteristics of insurance for legal expenditures which contribute to singling out the reasons underlying the underdevelopment of this market. We suggest that the crucial reason for such a failure is not adverse selection; consequently, we challenge the benefits of making coverage compulsory.     

“测谎”结论能否作为鉴定证据——关于中国心理测试技术研究应用及其现状的思考

"测谎",是日常概念,绝非科学术语。其科学称谓是犯罪心理测试技术,可简称心理测试技术或心测技术。测试结果能否作为证据,说法很多。中国心理测试技术研究与应用的现状,不容乐观;研讨其证据价值,必须首先对此状况及问题有深入了解。鉴于目前的混乱状况,将心理测试技术作为我国诉讼证据的条件尚不成熟。     

论鉴定结论质证的路径依赖

鉴定结论是鉴定人利用自己的专门知识或经验对案件事实或其他证据的解读,在保证鉴定结论准确性的三条进路中,提升质证质量不失为较佳的路径依赖。对鉴定结论的质证应当在当事人以及诉讼代理人参加的诉讼环境中引入专家辅助人和专家陪审员的参与机制,通过形成专家陪审员、专家辅助人和鉴定人三维构造的庭审质证模式使鉴定结论质量得到提升,从而保证借助鉴定结论认定事实的准确性。     

Dueling experts and imperfect verification

In the Dueling Experts Game, adversarial experts strategically produce “good” or “bad” evidence to support their partisan testimony. Good evidence is probative while bad evidence has no evidentiary value. The new feature of this Game is that Judge sometimes erroneously identifies good evidence as bad evidence and vice versa. Along the Game’s equilibrium path, each partisan expert produces only good evidence if it supports his side. When favorable good evidence is unavailable, an expert produces bad evidence to support his testimony. Hence, dueling experts always contradict one another. Despite their conflicting testimony, one of the experts invariably produces the available good evidence for Judge. Therefore, Judge always receives the available good evidence. A central result is that the quality of experts, including their ability to persuade judges using available good evidence, and the quality of judges – their ability to distinguish good from bad evidence – determine the accuracy of verdicts. Remarkably, the likelihood that experts are endowed with good evidence does not matter provided that this likelihood is not identically zero or one.     

论小额诉讼程序的构建

随着我国社会主义市场经济的飞速发展和人们权利观念的逐渐增强，民事纠纷尤其是小额纠纷的案件数量迅速增加。建立一种简易、快捷、低廉的法律制度，利于保障每一个公民能够通过诉讼实现自己的权利。设立小额诉讼程序，是司法改革的必然选择。从小额案件的特点以及我国现有的实践情况看，小额诉讼建立的价值取向：低成本和高效率。     

刍议警察出庭作证制度的确立——公安机关面临的问题及应对策略

修改后的刑事诉讼法首次以法律的形式规定了警察出庭作证制度。由于警察出庭作证在我国尚属新生事物，在实践中也没有相关经验和司法解释可以参考，因此大多数警察从心理上并未完全接受警察出庭作证制度，新法实施后他们一旦以证人身份走上法庭必将面临种种问题。为此，公安机关应当未雨绸缪，结合队伍现状，从多方面入手，通过理念灌输、强化庭审培训等方式及时适应这一发展。     

死刑量刑程序刍议

就目前中国的国情和司法现状而言，应当把死刑案件的改革集中在一审程序的加强和改造上，尤其是加强死刑量刑程序的规范化建设。应在我国死刑程序的审理中设立一个单独的量刑程序。重心在于解决选择合适的死刑量刑程序模式、提高证明标准、确立非法证据排除规则、引入量刑建议制度等方面的认识问题。构建我国死刑量刑程序的具体思路，应从量刑程序合议庭的组成、定罪程序与量刑程序的间隔、量刑程序的自动启动、控辨双方就证据进行质证、以及量刑程序中的特殊调查取证权等方面着眼。