军事审判权属性之争评述

军事审判权是军事司法权最为核心的基础,其属性之争一直是学术界热议的焦点。我国军事审判权属性重构要在承认审判权具有多重属性的基础上,以制度设计为出发点,同时考虑几方面的因素：一是军事审判权的司法化;二是要受本国历史文化的影响;三是与国家利益发展需求息息相关;从而改进实然意义上的军事审判制度,最终达到维护军事利益与维护军人合法权利的统一。     

网络侵权管辖在传统侵权管辖规则下的运用

传统的侵权管辖规则在侵权管辖中建立的巩固地位，由于网络侵权的诞生出现了松动的迹象。针对此，本文拟通过对国内外出现的新理论及实践中的做法的分析，提出：传统的民事诉讼管辖规则体系仍然能够容纳网络侵权的地域管辖，对传统经过一定的修正之后，依然可以作用于网络侵权这一领域。     

Lord Mustill and the Courts of Tennis – Dallah v Pakistan in England,France and Utopia

This note analyses the reasoning of the English and French courts in Dallah Real Estate and Tourism Holding Co v Ministry of Religious Affairs, Government of Pakistan, in which an arbitral tribunal had accepted jurisdiction over the Government of Pakistan on the basis of an arbitration agreement concluded by a trust that was created, controlled, and then extinguished by the Government. It highlights the English courts' clarifications on the degree to which arbitral awards should benefit from the presumption of validity at the stage of enforcement and discusses how the cultural background of the English and French judges – and of the arbitrators – drove them to come to contradictory results. Moreover, it argues that both judges and arbitrators, owing to the way the parties framed their arguments, probably missed the proper solution of the case.     

国际公约下扣船法院实体管辖权行使的限制——评《鹿特丹规则》第70条

首先就现有公约对扣船法院行使实体管辖权制约的规则进行评述,然后对《鹿特丹规则》第70条进行全面详尽的解读,并在此基础上,分析该条款确立的规则对中国的影响。     

论国际刑事法院管辖权与国家主权的冲突——以巴希尔逮捕令案为视角

依据《罗马公约》设立的国际刑事法院,是当代国际法制从威斯特伐利亚法治模式向自由法治模式转变的重要标志,转变的同时有关国际刑事法院管辖权规则对传统国家主权理论提出了挑战,引起国际社会对国家主权问题的审视。国际刑事法院设立以来,对非缔约国主权的影响问题、与国内普遍管辖权的协调问题、对刑事豁免权的态度问题凸显,这也是中美等大国拒绝加入《罗马公约》的关键所在。本文立足国际刑事法院管辖权与国家主权冲突,以具体的案例为证,揭开问题的实质。     

刑事案件管辖及审判期限的完善

刑事诉讼法和衍生的相关诉讼法规在某些地方规定的比较概括,执行过程中容易产生多种理解和处理办法,继而产生执法的随意性和不规范。有的法条明确规定但实践操作时发现不合理,执行起来比较困难。有的法条超越了刑事诉讼法且有抵触之嫌。理顺和调整刑诉法和一些法条,对于更好、更及时有效运用刑法打击犯罪,保证公共利益和公民合法权益很有必要。     

South African regulation of online casinos licensed in a foreign jurisdiction

Advances in technology brought about new popular gambling activities such as online gambling (sometimes called trans-border e-gaming) in South Africa and abroad, demand new regulatory structures since the current laws on gambling do not have provisions for online gambling. This article addresses the legality of engaging in online gambling within the South African borders by casino operators who are licensed in a foreign jurisdiction, giving rise to the issue of determining the place where the act of gambling takes place between a player who is in South Africa while engaging on the Internet with a server in another country. Although this article deals with the South African perspective, realizing that South Africa is a developing country and the law relating to the Internet might be behind, a reference to the online gambling law of United States (US) is made to showcase a need for attention to regulate online gambling in both developing and developed countries.     

泰国司法审判体制研究

泰国作为我国的邻国和东盟的成员国之一,是我国企业在东盟诸国中首选的投资国。对泰国司法审判制度的产生和建立的基础、司法审判体制的结构体系和泰国司法审判体制的渊源、现状和特色的总结分析,对泰国多法域问题的研究,特别是对泰国多法域问题成因的透视,以及对多法域问题社会现实体现形式的提炼和泰国多法域问题解决方法的展望,有着极其重要的现实意义和理论参考价值。     

界分审判权与团体自治权的理论模式——以日本的部分社会论为中心

部分社会论是日本的法官们为界定审判权的范围,通过判例发展出来的一种新的理论工具,其理论基础是"有社会,就有法"的法社会学观点."部分社会"内部发生的纷争,与国家法律没有直接关系,应依据团体内部的自治性规则解决,审判权不宜介入.但实际上,日本各级法院面对有关部分社会的纠纷时,并非简单地固守部分社会论,有时从实体和程序两个方面对团体自律权进行司法审查.在思维方式上,部分社会论首先认定不属于审判权对象的事项,从而间接地确定审判权的对象.部分社会论给予我们的启示是:从宪政的高度,明确"案件"、"审判权"的含义;根据审判权属性,选择理想的受案范围立法模式;以强化说理为着眼点,提高审判水平;以审判为中心,推动法学理论创新.     

Difficulties Confronted by ICSID Tribunals in Deciding International Investment Corruption Cases and Possible Solutions

The issue of corruption has attracted increasing attention in the study and practice of international investment law during recent years. After taking prudent consideration of the corruption defense invoked by the host states in some international investment arbitration cases involved with corruption, International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunals accordingly determined the final awards. However, some parts of the arbitral jurisprudence aroused strong criticism, especially with regard to the ICSID tribunals’ reasoning that arbitrators have no jurisdiction over corruption-tainted international investments. The ICSID tribunals are legitimately supposed to exercise their jurisdiction and are lawfully obliged to probe into the nature of corrupt activities. The tribunals are strongly expected to adopt a balanced approach in deciding the merits and fairly weighing the obligations, rights, and interests of both disputing parties. It is preferable to strengthen the collaborative interaction between ICSID proceedings and domestic anti-corruption enforcement mechanisms when it comes to combating corrupt international investment activities. Existing international treaties (or specific treaty provisions) on combating corruption in international business transactions and calling for international cooperation, alongside domestic anti-corruption enforcement legislation, have actually laid solid legal foundations for the establishment of such an anti-corruption coordinative mechanism between ICSID and domestic corruption regulatory authorities on the global level.