隐私权视野下的网上公开裁判文书之限

裁判文书的上网是落实审判公开的一项有力措施,但其对隐私权的威胁亦不容忽视。裁判文书的全文上网原则上应预先获得当事人的同意,当然,若裁判文书涉及公共利益,则隐私权也应受到限制。但因公共利益的需要而将裁判文书上网时,仍应对具有可识别性的个人信息和其他重要信息予以保密。被害人、证人、未成年人的隐私权应予特殊保护。调解书原则上不应通过网络公开。     

自救还是他救：受害人的权利救济问题研究

受害人是指所有认为自己的权利受到侵害的人,受害人的权利源于自然状态中人的生存需要和人作为人的道德资格,应当首先承认每个人都有认定自己权利受到侵害的主观权利,赋予每个人确认受害人的资格和自由。在这个前提下,区分"命不好的人"、"受苦的人"和"特殊的不幸的人"才具有现实基础,也为甄别不同形式的救济理论确立了立论的基础和方向。现代权利救济理论承认受害人作为权利主体和救济主体的双重身份,它的使命在于贯彻自我救济的权利这一核心观念,从而与道德范式下的怜悯论和神学意义上的救赎学拉开了距离,以此张扬人的价值和自我救赎的世俗意义,为与一种合乎正义的社会结构相契合的善政或权利的道德提供驱动力。     

新时期山东省扩大对外开放问题研究

改革开放30多年来,山东省始终坚持改革开放不动摇,不断推动对外开放向纵深发展,逐步形成了全方位、宽领域、多层次的对外开放格局,有效推进了山东省国际化进程.新世纪的第二个十年,国内外环境正呈现一系列新变化、新特点,也是山东省建设全面小康社会的关键时期.在新的历史时期,要切实增强对外开放的责任感和紧迫感,更加重视统筹国内发展和对外开放,把对外开放作为经济社会发展全局当中的重点工作加以推进,切实做到以开放促改革、促创新、促发展,实现新时期对外开放的新跨越,促进山东省经济社会平稳较快发展.     

越级上访产生的原因及其治理

《信访条例》第4条明确规定,信访工作应当坚持分级负责等原则。分级负责原则说明,上访必须按程序进行,遵循“逐级上访”的原则,而不能“越级上访”,越级上访不利于解决问题。之所以会产生越级上访的现象,原因很复杂,但主要原因在于一些地方政府对访民不重视、信访机制运行不畅等。因此,治理越级上访,需要推进信访体制改革,破解越级上访的症结;坚决贯彻落实信访责任追究制度;树立法治权威,建设法治社会;提升信访等政府部门治理与善治的能力与水平。     

促进社会公平构建和谐社会

社会公平是和谐社会的基石,收入分配不公导致贫富差别拉大,社会矛盾和冲突增加。构建和谐社会必须寻找多种途径维护和促进社会公平:即以发展来促进公平;从思想上更加关注公平;以制度来保障公平;从群众最关心的利益问题入手来促进公平。     

对"扑克牌通缉令"的思考

发布通缉令是公安机关为了缉拿依法应当逮捕但在逃的犯罪嫌疑人的特殊命令.美国军队在伊拉克战争中将通缉令和扑克牌有机的联系了起来,这一做法被河南省荥阳市的公安部门所吸收,发布了我国国内第一套"扑克牌通缉令".但是这一套"扑克牌通缉令"在形式合法性、空间局限性和实效有限性上都存在着问题,使其不能符合"法治精神"的要求.这一改革存在的弊端再一次暴露出我国公安机关在刑事侦查活动中"重实体、轻程序"的旧观念.     

论工会干部教育培训的改进与创新

要把工会干部培养成“三家”,并具有“五种能力”,就要调整传统的培训内容和结构,围绕培养“三家”和提高“五种能力”的要求,设计工会干部培训的内容。按照不同层次和类别,设计培训目标和培训要求。要对不同层次类别的干部,采取不同的培训方式。     

Reforming the Role of Magistrates: Implications for Summary Justice in England and Wales

The role of lay magistrates in England and Wales has been progressively undermined by protracted processes of reform over the last two decades. Current government proposals aim to reorient and ‘strengthen’ their function through the creation of new magisterial responsibilities such as oversight of out of court disposals and greater involvement with local justice initiatives. This article argues that while these proposals embody necessary and important areas for reform, taken in isolation they will fail to consolidate the role of magistrates in summary justice unless they are enacted alongside other measures which aim to reaffirm the status of lay justices, and which seek to reverse the trend which has prioritised administrative efficiency at the expense of lay justice. Rapidly declining magistrate numbers together with continuous (and continuing) programs of court closures are irreconcilable with the future viability of a lay magistracy.     

What does it mean to suffer loss? Haxton v Philips Electronics

In Haxton v Philips Electronics the Court of Appeal considered whether a widow could recover the diminution in value of her dependency claim following the defendant's tortious reduction of her life expectancy. The note outlines the development of the common law, demonstrating that Haxton is novel but not unorthodox, and tests whether Haxton's principles can provide a sound foundation for future cases. Positing three hypothetical scenarios, it argues that the disparity in outcome, rather than indicating a lack of unifying principle, as was suggested in Jobling v Associated Dairies, may be explained by combining Austin's division between primary and secondary rights with Gardner and Stevens' contributions as to how they are protected. Restitutio in integrum requires consideration of the reasons and values underlying the right in question and these are discernible in the jurisprudence. The note also considers whether Haxton could have been decided on the basis that a defendant should not profit from its own wrongdoing.     

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.