预防与控制国际海事欺诈法律机制研究

海事欺诈可以说是国际贸易的痼疾 ,怎样防治海事欺诈已成为当前国际贸易体系中急待解决的问题。本文试图从海事欺诈的特征及产生的原因深层次探讨产生海事欺诈的经济制度上的原因 ,并从国际法和国内法双重层面去讨论如何防治海事欺诈。     

非WTO法在WTO争端解决中的适用

WTO专家组和上诉机构具有充分的理由适用非WTO法,DSB解决争端的实践表明非WTO法在WTO争端解决程序中具有广泛的效力。非WTO法不仅可以使专家组中止管辖权,甚至在更多的情况下使专家组拒绝管辖,而且非WTO法能有效地证明某些违反WTO规则的做法具有正当性。     

死刑的司法与立法限制--量刑情节的制约

立足云南省死刑适用的司法实践,结合实务部门判处死刑考虑的量刑情节,对如何从实际数量上减少死刑适用并进而从立法上减少死刑罪名提出一些实用性思路.     

建立国际统一的管辖权和判决承认与执行制度--海牙《选择法院协议公约》述评

海牙国际私法会议于2005年6月所通过的<选择法院协议公约>系迄今为止国际社会在法院管辖权和外国法院判决承认和执行方面意义最为深远的一个公约.本文首先介绍了本文公约产生的背景以及公约的结构.之后,作者就公约中关于统一管辖权的规定进行了较为详细的评述被选择法院行使管辖权的权利和应该行使管辖权的义务、未被选择法院不行使管辖权的义务以及临时保护措施不受公约约束的例外规定.关于公约中所规定的外国法院判决的承认与执行制度作者从六个方面进行了探讨承认与执行外国判决的一般义务、承认与执行外国判决的例外情形、不审查与事实认定、先决问题、损害赔偿问题以及承认和执行外国判决的法律适用问题.     

行政自由裁量权行使中的显失公正问题及其防范

公正的价值,应是行政自由裁量权行使中追求的价值目标。目前在行政自由裁量权的行使过程中,由于一些原因导致了行政自由裁量权有可能偏离公正价值。本文试图分析行政自由裁量权运行过程中与公正偏离的可能性及其原因,并提出防范其偏离的有效性措施。     

马六甲海峡西段海盗活动适用于普遍管辖权

长期以来,马六甲海峡沿岸国家负责海峡航运安全管理,他们坚持对海峡内的海盗活动进行排他性管理,仅同意非沿岸国家间接参与。通过对相关统计数据与《联合国海洋法公约》等国际法律制度的详细分析,作者认为海峡西段为海盗活动重心,这一区域的海盗活动适用于普遍管辖权制度,海峡沿岸国的做法缺乏国际法依据。主要由沿岸国实施的现有反海盗制度是有效的,海盗活动猖獗的局面不大可能重现。     

美国证券法域外管辖的最新发展及其启示

2010年,美国联邦最高法院在Morrison案中颠覆了由第二巡回法院创立的域外适用证券法的传统,转而采用"交易标准"。此后不久,国会在《华尔街改革和消费者保护法》中又重新引入了"效果标准"和"行为标准",期望以此强化对境内投资者和资本市场的保护。为建立国际金融中心,中国应汲取美国的经验和教训,有限度地推行本国证券法的域外管辖,特别是应模糊证券法的域外管辖问题,将自主权赋予法院。同时,法院应充分考虑和尊重证监会的相关决定。     

军舰护航打击索马里海盗：法律依据和司法程序安排

军舰护航涉及国内法和国际法双重依据问题,其中联合国安理会的相关决议和索马里政府的同意,构成军舰护航打击索马里海盗的国际法依据。随着打击海盗行动的深入发展,法律合作成为打击海盗国际合作中亟待加强的重要领域。各国应尽快订立或完善刑事罪名,确立对海盗的普遍管辖权;协议海盗疑犯的移交、审判和监管安排,为军舰护航打击海盗提供法律基础;加强对索马里海域沿岸国的援助,帮助其加强国内司法能力建设。     

The Cybercrime Convention Committee's 2017 Guidance Note on Production Orders: Unilateralist transborder access to electronic evidence promoted via soft law

This article provides a critical analysis of the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Committee's Guidance Note of Production Orders, published on 1 March 2017. The article looks at the legal controversies surrounding production orders with a cross-border element. It explains the Guidance Note's background and origins, the basic provisions in the Cybercrime Convention allowing the law enforcement authorities to order and obtain certain information and discusses the requirements that follow from the relevant provisions of the Convention. This analysis is complemented by four critical remarks on the way the Guidance Note pushes the boundaries of acceptable treaty interpretation on the necessity of the Guidance Note, its position in regard to extraterritorial enforcement jurisdiction and sovereignty, its reticence towards fundamental rights and its refusal to define or clarify the important notion of “subscriber information”. The article argues that unilateralism is not a solution. Instead of soft law plumbing, what is needed is an agreement between sovereign states checked by their constituencies.     

RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS BETWEEN CHINA,JAPAN AND SOUTH KOREA IN THE NEW ERA: SOUTH KOREAN LAW PERSPECTIVE

This article discusses the rules for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as “South Korea” or “Korea”). Articles 217 and 217-2 of the Civil Procedure Act of Korea and Articles 26 and 27 of the Civil Enforcement Act of Korea provide for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments respectively. Korea has not entered into any bilateral or multilateral treaties regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and is not a party to the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. The article also considers the current undesirable status of recognition and enforcement of judgments in the region consisting of China, Japan and South Korea (hereinafter referred to as “Region”) and suggests a course of action to be taken to improve the situation. The author believes that the experts of the Region should embark upon a project to improve the current situation and that the first step should be to exchange and gather information on the current legal regime of the countries in the Region on the recognition and enforcement of judgments. The author looks forward to future cooperation among the experts in the Region on this topic and is confident that the reciprocity requirement, which currently is a major obstacle to the mutual recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the Region, will be overcome in the near future.