对聚众犯罪若干问题的思考

聚众犯罪是一种以聚众为犯罪构成必要条件的类罪,其侵犯的客体主要是社会管理秩序,客观方面必须具备聚众行为和直接危害行为,犯罪主体主要是首要分子和积极参加者,主观方面为直接故意。聚众犯罪不一定是共同犯罪。它与集团犯罪之间既有联系,也有区别。     

浅谈当前不同类型有组织犯罪的联系和区别

在刑事犯罪中,黑社会性质组织、犯罪集团、流氓恶势力犯罪都是有组织的普通刑事犯罪,社会危害严重,为维护社会秩序和保护人民生命财产安全,保障经济建设的顺利进行,必须要正确区分,并依法从重从快予以惩处。     

论盗窃罪适用中的几个问题

以盗窃罪司法适用中的几个疑难问题为研究对象 ,对作为盗窃对象的无形物的范围及其认定、盗窃数额中的几种特殊情形以及盗窃过程中损毁公私财物行为的定性问题作了较为深入的探讨。     

论洗钱罪的主体

本文主要对洗钱罪主体的争议问题作了论述,提出了洗钱罪的主体应当包括上游犯罪行为人,并从刑法理论、刑事司法实践、世界刑事立法现状及趋势以及国际刑事司法合作的角度进行了较为详尽的论述。     

我国应建立青少年前科消除制度

中国现行的青少年前科终身保留制度 ,使有前科之青少年不可避免地终身受歧视 ,这不仅忽略了青少年犯罪的特殊性 ,而且违背了青少年法的宗旨及有关规定。借鉴西方经验 ,构建中国的青少年前科消除制度 ,不仅可以促使青少年的重新社会化 ,而且可以预防其重新犯罪。     

TESTS OF NONLINEAR DYNAMICS IN U.S. HOMICIDE TIME SERIES,AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS*

Attempts to explain temporal patterns in U.S. homicide data usually assume that a linear process accounts for the variation. A nonlinear process is an obvious alternative, however, and reasonable arguments suggest that nonlinearity may in part underlie homicide series dynamics. This paper applies tests for nonlinearity to national time series of homicide rates and counts. The results provide relatively little evidence of nonlinear structure; instead, a linear (random walk) process appears to generate most of the change in the series. Although this supports the unstated assumptions of current theories, it also raises questions about why homicides should follow a linear time path in the first place.     

委托理财协议中的保底条款效力之追问

保底条款是委托理财协议中最重要的条款,它不仅决定了这种投资方式的存在与否,同时亦是委托理财失败诉争时当事双方相持不下的根本原因。对于该条款的效力认定,目前的法律与司法实践并没有提供能真正能起到指导与评价作用的答案。因此,从合同的私法性、社会法性及保底条款与其它条款的勾连角度来追问保底条款的效力问题是合理与适法判决的关键所在。     

二层次四要件犯罪构成论——兼议正当化行为的体系地位

以解决正当化行为在犯罪论体系中地位不定,及其与犯罪构成关系不明为突破口;以反映定罪过程、权力与权利的平衡以及对抗制的诉讼程序特点为价值立场;兼顾中国已有的理论与实务情况,主张在我国犯罪构成论的应有结构为两层次四要件犯罪构成结构.此即:第一层次,三个要件,依次为犯罪客观要件、犯罪主体要件和犯罪主观要件;第二层次为犯罪客体一个要件,其中,正当化行为等作为排除犯罪客体的事由在此纳入犯罪构成要件之中.无此事由,犯罪即告成立.     

国际刑事司法协助制度的若干新发展

《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》和《联合国反腐败公约》对国际刑事司法协助制度的新近发展作出了一定程度的总结,特别是确立了以追缴被非法转移的犯罪所得或收益为中心的司法协助新体系,放宽了双重犯罪原则对非强制性司法协助活动的限制作用,全面推广司法协助"中央机关"的联系机制,同时,倡导各国在条件允许的情况下采纳远程视频听证和联合调查的取证新方式。这些发展所涉及的一些新规则值得加以深入研究。     

The GMO food arena in the EU (1998–2001)

A highly politicised arena in the EU has been caused by the 1998 Commission legislative proposal with regard to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The debate over different interests became more intense. During the EU decision‐making process concerning GMOs, two larger coalitions cutting across institutions and countries waged the fight: one was led by industry and was in favour of GMOs and the other was against and mainly rooted in nongovernmental lobby groups. In mid‐2001, the ‘anti’ movement had gained a (temporary) winning position. In an attempt to explain this, it was concluded that the industrial lobby has been nonchalant in its preparatory work for public affairs management, by not carefully studying the various stakeholders, issues, time developments and the boundaries of this arena. With the benefit of hindsight it can be seen that the industrial lobby itself has missed opportunities and made unforced errors. Copyright © 2003 Henry Stewart Publications