行政补偿主体制度研究

补偿主体的确定是行政补偿的首要环节。我国现行与行政补偿有关的法律没有确定补偿主体的指导原则,补偿主体往往就是征收主体,这种政府既做“运动员”又做“裁判员”的模式极易引发“政群对立”。在比较分析的基础上指出行政补偿应以“受益者补偿”作为其主体确定基准,同时探讨了我国行政补偿主体的现存类型及存在问题,提出健全我国行政补偿主体制度的构想。     

非强制性行政行为的增长与公安行政执法

在公共选择理论下,政府行为取决于公民的意愿和选择。或者说,一个负责任的政府是要不断地满足公民的权利吁求的。公众对公安机关直接强制行政行为的反感,促使公安机关转变执法观念,摆正位置,开发和运用多种具有行政指导、行政契约等非强制性的行政方式和服务措施,既达到了公安机关维护社会治安、推行治安管理的目的,又为群众所接受。这是公安行政执法改革与发展的一个重要趋势。     

通过诉讼的政府控制

没有控制的权力必然导致腐败.政府权力应受到控制已成为世界各法治国家所遵从的一条公理.政府权力的无限扩张性、执政理念转变的必然性使人们开始意识到有限制政府权力之必要.实现法治国家首先要求对政府权力有所控制,通过诉讼(行政诉讼和宪法诉讼)对政府进行控制不失为一条有效的途径.针对当前国际国内形势,首先要弱化权力崇拜、强化行政服务,其次要完善行政诉讼法、加强对政府的监督,而宪法的权威性和至上性决定了通过宪法诉讼是控制政府权力的首要选择.我国在完善行政诉讼的同时亟须建立适合我国国情的宪法诉讼制度.     

Parental Alienation in U.S. Courts, 1985 to 2018

Courts have been dealing with alienating behaviors in high conflict family litigation for hundreds of years. Experts in the behavioral sciences have been writing about mothers and fathers manipulating their children to disparage the other parent for more than seventy years. But in the last two decades some social scientists and legal professionals have questioned the legitimacy of parental alienation as a concept and its admissibility in child abuse and child custody litigation. This study was designed to examine the extent to which courts in the United States have found the concept of parental alienation material, probative, relevant and admissible. Thirty‐four years of cases were found with a WESTLAW query and analyzed. Cases were selected for study only if the record reflected that a judge or an independent expert found the concept of parental alienation to be of value in the litigation. Results illustrate increasing awareness of the concept and document its admissibility in every one of the United States. The numbers, sex of the alienating parent and prevalence of significant custody changes are discussed. Limitations inherent in this form of quantitative analysis are also discussed with recommendations for future research.     

Empirical Evaluation of the Reliability of Photogrammetry Software in the Recovery of Three-Dimensional Footwear Impressions

This paper examines the reliability of Structure from Motion (SfM) photogrammetry as a tool in the capture of forensic footwear marks. This is applicable to photogrammetry freeware DigTrace but is equally relevant to other SfM solutions. SfM simply requires a digital camera, a scale bar, and a selection of oblique photographs of the trace in question taken at the scene. The output is a digital three-dimensional point cloud of the surface and any plastic trace thereon. The first section of this paper examines the reliability of photogrammetry to capture the same data when repeatedly used on one impression, while the second part assesses the impact of varying cameras. Using cloud to cloud comparisons that measure the distance between two-point clouds, we assess the variability between models. The results highlight how little variability is evident and therefore speak to the accuracy and consistency of such techniques in the capture of three-dimensional traces. Using this method, 3D footwear impressions can, in many substrates, be collected with a repeatability of 97% with any variation between models less than ~0.5 mm.     

论诉讼证据种类的划分

证据形式问题属证据法的基础问题。从法律上看,《民事诉讼法》第六十三条、《刑事诉讼法》第四十二条、《行政诉讼法》第三十一条分别规定了七种证据形式,构成了我国的证据种类体系。证据种类的划分是证据发挥其证明作用的前提,也是世界各国证据理论上要解决的首要问题。我国有必要建立一个系统的证据体系,一方面使证据种类体系具有开放性、包容性和逻辑性,另一方面有利于审判的进行。     

论当事人收集证据的程序保障

我国在20世纪90年代的民事庭审方式改革中引入了举证责任原则,庭审的对抗性由此得以增强,证据的重要地位也逐渐凸现,这就要求加强当事人收集证据的程序保障。但我国关于当事人收集证据的程序保障的法律规定是严重缺失的,这不仅严重影响了诉讼程序效用的发挥,也阻碍了我国诉讼制度的改革进程。因此应通过加快程序保障措施的法律化,构建独立的审前准备程序,扩大律师的调查取证权,设立书证、视听资料、物证提出命令制度及庭外证人证言收集制度等措施加强当事人收集证据的程序保障。     

公安行政问责制的完善

随着我国"问责风暴"向"制度问责"的转变,如何更好地完善公安行政问责制就成为一个紧迫而现实的课题。目前制约公安行政问责制功能发挥的因素主要包括:公安行政文化滞后、职权划分模糊、问责主体角色缺位、警务公开度有限和警察绩效评估机制不完善等。针对上述制约因素,营造公安行政问责文化、严格划分权责界限、强调异体问责、加强警务公开以及完善绩效评估机制就构成了完善公安行政问责制的基本思路。     

网络传销犯罪的司法认定逻辑及其修正

基于传销犯罪的诈骗本质以及网络传销所衍生的诸多形式,原有的组织、领导传销活动罪的界定已经无法适应惩治网络传销犯罪的需要,应当基于体系与实践的双重考量,对网络传销犯罪的立法和司法作出相应的调适。组织、领导传销活动罪与集资诈骗罪系交叉竞合关系,两者在量刑上应保持平衡。网络传销犯罪在法益侵害程度方面未必高于传统传销犯罪。司法解释性文件对于网络传销犯罪的认定不应囿于组织内部参与传销活动人员30人三级的标准。网络团队计酬不应当构成犯罪。对于混合型传销,则应当结合"骗取财物"的要件予以全面判断。对为网络传销犯罪提供网络服务的行为,应区分情况适用共同犯罪、非法利用信息网络罪与帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪。对网络传销犯罪作证据综合认定时,应优先客观性证据,确立互联网电子数据的中枢证明作用,修正逐一收集参与传销活动人员的言词证据规则。