介入因素下的刑法因果关系

刑法理论界对因果关系问题一直存有争议,而对介入因素下的因果关系进行系统性分析却不多见。对刑法因果关系,我们不仅需要逻辑的分析,更需要经验的归纳。只有从多角度探求解决刑法上因果关系问题的途径,才能真正找到一条切实可适用于司法实践的进路。     

海洛因成瘾者美沙酮维持治疗心理矫治综述

对海洛因成瘾者的戒毒需要药物治疗,更需要心理干预与社会支持.美沙酮维持治疗门诊要有效提高维持率,保证维持治疗效果,对受治者进行综合干预是必不可少的.加强在治疗初期对戒毒者的心理干预力度,戒毒者才能长期坚持治疗,达到美沙酮维持治疗效果.     

第三人介入型因果关系与责任归咎分析

在行为至结果的因果流程中介入第三人行为,使因果流程发生变化或者产生不同结果等情形时,如何解决前行为人以及第三人与结果之间的关联和责任归咎问题,是因果关系领域与司法实践亟待解决的难题。应着眼于自我负责原则,具体衡量两种行为所造成的风险的影响力,分析最终结果是何种行为所制造的风险的实现。只有这样,才能将第三人介入类型的责任归属问题圆满解决。     

公司司法解散浅探

公司司法解散作为市场主体的退出机制有其存在的必要性,各国立法和司法实践均对此做出不同回应。其理论基石是公司契约理论和股东利益落空理论,在司法权介入公司内部时,应注意处理好适度干预与公司自治下的商业判断,尊重公司和股东自治,妥善处理司法解散案件。     

论不作为犯罪中的先行行为

先行行为之作为义务只能是法律义务,不能是道德义务,否则,就会扩大犯罪范围,违反罪刑法定原则。先行行为必须限定一定的条件才负有作为义务。不作为犯罪中的先行行为可以是过失犯罪行为,但不包括故意犯罪行为。正当行为只可能引起道德上或民事上的义务,不能引起刑法上的作为义务。正当行为不能成为不作为犯罪的先行行为,否则,刑法体现的价值是对非法行为的保护。     

媒体介入对刑事诉讼的影响及坚持的原则

随着大众传播媒体的迅速发展,因其所具有的传播速度快、受众面广、公开及时等特点,已经越来越深入社会生活的方方面面。在刑事司法领域,媒体介入,特别是刑事侦查和审判阶段的介入,已然成为社会所热议的焦点和专家学者所研究的热点。媒体介入是一把双刃剑,在刑事诉讼活动中既能表现出监督司法机关诉讼活动、培养民众法律意识和法制观念等有利的一面,又能体现出阻碍侦查活动、妨碍诉讼活动的正常进行,甚至出现"媒体审判"等不利的一方面。必须通过重点分析媒体介入对刑事诉讼的影响,才能提出媒体介入刑事诉讼所应坚持的原则,以便协调舆论媒体与司法机关之间的关系。     

Coalitions and American Military Intervention *

As the only superpower in the international system, the United States uses its force and takes military intervention abroad more often than any other state. Researchers usually argue that the United States has strong unilateral incentives to make decisions and implement military intervention—the US is prone to use or threaten to use the force frequently and obstinately, ignoring the United Nations and international law. An investigation of major US military interventions in the post-Cold War era shows that the United States has often relied on temporary coalitions rather than persistent alliances in military and stability operations, although its decisions to use force are less constrained by the international community. The United States has motivations to recruit multinational military coalitions, such as avoiding the dilemma of collective action, reducing the burden of intervention and acclaiming the legitimacy of their interventions. Military coalitions have clearly-defined missions and flexible means, which provide convenience for the United States to take a leading role in military interventions.     

No humanitarian intervention in Asian genocides: how possible and legitimate?

Abstract

This article addresses an important empirical puzzle: why has the United States, without exception, chosen not to intervene in the six humanitarian catastrophes in post-war Asia, namely in Indonesia, East Pakistan/Bangladesh, Cambodia, East Timor, Sri Lanka and Myanmar? We use an eclectic approach that blends arguments about the international normative structure and geostrategic interests to examine what has made the absence of humanitarian intervention in Asia by the US possible and legitimate. Specifically, we focus on the paradox between calls for humanitarian intervention and the historically and geographically contingent social construction of the norms of humanity, national sovereignty and United Nations-backed multilateralism in conjunction with US and Chinese concerns over their regional geostrategic interests. The normative narratives about race, ‘communists’, ‘terrorists’, international order and inclusive multilateral processes, and the geostrategic interests of the US and China, combine to make non-intervention possible and legitimate.     

R2P: “State of Play”

Abstract

Is R2P the most effective tool the international community has to prevent genocide, or the newest neo-imperial norm perpetuated by the most powerful states? In a dramatic performance of the key debates within R2P, each of these views is presented before Aristotlean and Tocquevillean insights are drawn upon to find a middle ground rooted in citizen resistance against mass atrocity crimes. R2P can both become a more effective tool of prevention and gain needed political legitimacy by drawing on the rich historical tradition of citizen resistance to empower local actors defying regimes engaged in mass atrocity crimes.