论刑事和解制度的宪政依据

刑事和解已成为法学界关注的热点问题。刑事法学界围绕刑事和解的理论与实践等基本问题进行了一定的探讨,并形成了我国刑事和解制度构建的不同观点。然而,关于刑事和解制度宪政基础的研究并没有随着相关讨论的展开而日见清晰,这种模糊状态存在的原因主要是学界对刑事和解制度宪政依据的挖掘和认识不够。刑事和解制度宪政依据的研究,对刑事和解制度的建立与顺畅运行意义重大。     

中国经济法学总论30年研究:关键词视角

经济法是现代法,极少有现代化与传统冲突的痛苦,其开放性和对新观念、新理论的强劲吸纳能力,便于从现代化的理论和实践中获得支撑。中国经济法学总论30年研究表明,在我国传统、现代与后现代的共时性存在的具体语境下,经济法总论重在探究市场与政府、经济与法律、私法与公法这三对关键词。经济法既是“有关经济的法”,又是“经济法”。认真对待经济法,就必须克服“中国式”市场与政府、经济与法律、国家与社会、科技与财政等种种挑战,介于经济私法与经济公法、经济学与经济政策、经济行政与经济行政政策、传统与现代等横切面之间进行研究。经济法应主要作为法律科学而不是法律部门,经济法理论应由“小经济法”转向“大经济法”。这种“否定之否定”的角色转型,有助于解决“中国经济法学向何处去”的问题,真正面向中国社会的真问题,与西方经济法学前沿理论开展有建设性的对话。     

Imagining the law and the constitution of societal order in Los Angeles Police Chief William Parker＇s 1965 ＂Crime and the Great Society＂ address

Legal scholar James Boyd White has challenged both lawyers and rhetoricians to imagine the law as an enterprise of language. In contending that members of the legal profession should see law as an activity of speech and imagination occurring in a social world, he has urged lawyers to view the legal profession as an interaction of authoritative texts and as a process of legal thought and argument instead of thinking of law as a technical system of regulations and applying its rules in a mechanical way. By asking members of the legal professional to consider law as rhetoric, White has encouraged them to recognize the socially constitutive nature of language, which runs contrary to a perspective of law as machine or, rather, the law as only a mechanistic system of rules and regulations. His ideas have inspired the ＂law and literature＂ movement, which has motivated other scholars to analyze the texts of judicial opinions, for example, according to White＇s theories. However, this essay takes White＇s concept of imagining the law and applies it public address and, specifically, to the 1965 ＂Crime and the Great Society＂ speech given by former Los Angeles Police Chief William Parker. Chief Parker＇s address reveals a vision for the City of Los Angeles in which Parker, himself, asks his audience of citizens and civic leaders to share for advancing a specific agenda for law enforcement＇s role in society.     

Public security versus privacy in technology law: A balancing act?

Technology invades a person's privacy but this has been justified in law on public security grounds. The more technology advances, the more difficult it is to control its privacy intrusive use. This paper argues that there are a number of difficulties posed by such use concerning the respect of one's privacy. The meaning of ‘public security’ is not entirely clear and there are various laws which authorise the invasion of privacy for public security reasons. Technology is developing at such a fast pace and in a more diffused manner without taking on board its privacy implications whilst technological privacy enhancement mechanisms are not catching up. The law of privacy is not sufficiently elaborate and is slow in coming to terms to deal with these novel situations posed by rapid technological advances. The paper thus develops universally legally binding minimum core principles that could be applied indiscriminately to all privacy intrusive technology.     

认真对待刑事搜查

刑事搜查是对公民人身自由权、财产权、住宅权和隐私权等宪法基本权利的强制干预,其理论基础是达致控制犯罪和保障人权的双重目的与平衡公正和效率的价值追求。现有立法关于刑事搜查的规定简单粗疏,侦查机关僭越立法权限加以合目的性解释,并在执法中效率优先兼顾程序,因此,需要对刑事搜查进行技术改造。     

学位评定立法：原则、主体、程序和救济

在学位评定制度立法中,应奉行标准化和多样性平衡、学术性和行政性衔接的原则。应确立答辩委员会与学校学位评定委员会这两个学位评定主体,形成答辩委员会实施实质性审查、学校学位评定委员会进行形式性审查的二级评审体系。同时,必须对评定程序作出细密谨严的规定并应形成校内申诉、行政复议和行政诉讼的三步骤救济机制。     

论刑民冲突之宪法调适

“刑民冲突”现象乃法律规范竞合之一种,惟在宪法的调适下方有合理解决之可能。宪法上的罪刑法定原则与私法自治原则为协调刑民冲突之规范基础,它确立了刑法规范在刑事案件审理中的绝对优先适用地位,但是也为国家公权力机关干预私经济活动、维护市场经济秩序设置了宪法界限及行为准则。在“刑民冲突”案件中,司法机关当以宪法规范为依据,依循“合宪性解释”、“目的解释”等方法对刑法规范与民法规范尽量形成规范内涵、规范意旨协调一致之解释。     

新中国宪法权利理论发展评述——以方法论为视角

中国宪法权利理论已经逐步摆脱了早期单一的法哲学方法的研究,法解释学的方法成为宪法学研究的新趋势,具有中国特色的宪法权利的法解释学呼之欲出。伴随着上述方法论的变迁,关于宪法权利的保障模式理论也摒弃了那种单纯的相对保障说,更多学者主张宪法权利的直接保障说。如果抛开中国语境,上述研究甚至已经实现了与当今西方宪法权利理论的接轨。然而,对于产生于西方特定历史阶段的种种宪法权利学说的借鉴,仍需结合我国立宪主义的历史课题和法治发展的现状来展开。     

宪法保留：对基本自由权利限制的限制原则

法律保留原则要求某些重要事项必须留给立法机关以法律的形式加以规定,目的是约束行政权,防止行政权滥用,并在客观上要求司法机关依法裁判;然而,宪政的本质特征之一是有限政府的理念,即使是立法机关的权力本身也应当是有限度的。实际上,宪政国家违宪审查制度的普遍确立正是主要基于对立法权滥用的矫正;而我国从依法治国到依宪治国思路的转变也在事实上承认了立法权本身存在滥用的可能。因此,从法律保留到宪法保留,是保障人民基本自由权的重要原则,这一原则立基于对多数决暴政的恐惧和对有限政府理念的信奉,它在一定程度上杜绝了宪法一手承认人民基本自由权利,而法律的另一手却又予以剥夺的弊病。     

中国语境下的宪法解释方法的艺术性运用

随着国内的许多案件先后都适用了宪法审理案件,国内逐步地开始认可我国的宪法司法适用及其宪法解释方法的运用。但是宪法司法适用中的解释不同于立法性解释、英美国家的法官解释以及哲学意义上的解释。源于美国的司法审查制度的合宪性推定原则被引介并发扬,中国的宪法方法论更应该成为一种中国语境下的合宪性推定,并被法官在具体司法实践中被艺术性的运用。