论一般人格权制度的适用——以德国法之做法为参考

具体人格权的法定化要求一般人格权的承认。与具体人格权相比,一般人格权具有极大的抽象性与可扩展性。德国民法理论与司法实践对一般人格权适用与运行机制的把握,既保证了一般人格权制度适用上的广适性,也保证了其适用上的妥帖性。此种做法应由我国民法典立法予以借鉴。     

纯粹中国美学话语:何以可能

在比较语境下研究中国美学话语,由于存在着中西两种话语本质的相异,西方话语只能转换为其所蕴涵的方法,以便于发明中国问题。其学术理念可以表述为:借助于西方方法之发明,以中国话语来表述中国问题,并最终形成中国方法,而不脱比较语境。据此可以对中国美学话语重建中存在的如何处置西方方法和话语的问题做出回应。     

试论公共政策的社会总体利益取向

公共利益内涵的模糊和不确定,以及关于公共利益的种种争论,对公共政策的“公共利益取向说”提出了挑战。公共政策的终极目标是实现以人为本的全面、协调、可持续的社会发展,此目标决定了公共政策的社会总体利益最大化取向。“社会总体利益最大化”与政府等公共部门的“公共性”并不矛盾,相反,二者是统一的保持“公共性”是追求社会总体利益最大化的重要前提和基础,追求社会总体利益的最大化是“公共性”的集中体现和必然要求。     

我国治安行政教育与处罚相结合原则研究

教育与处罚相结合原则是具有中国特色的行政原则,深为广大人民群众所认可和拥护。然而,近年来教育与处罚相结合原则在现实治安行政执法中遭遇尴尬,原则的理论阐释存在误区和现有法律制度存在缺陷是问题产生的两个重要原因。系统探究解决问题的有效方法十分必要,以和谐法治理念完善法律制度、构建科学理论、指导管理实践是解决问题的根本出路。     

风险意识的精神内涵及其中国语境管窥

风险社会是理性化的现代化自反的结果。理性的现代化仍然是正在进行的行动,风险也正在增强,因而风险在很大程度上是现代人造风险。风险意识是面向未来的反思,这种反思具有自觉和责任意识,其精神内涵实质是批判与超越意识。对现代性处于生成之中的中国而言,生活在风险已成为世界性图景中的当代人,需要树立风险意识,需要在批判和超越、全面发展观之中建设现代化,这样,我们才能在现代化路上走得更有协调性、科学性、持续性、安全性。     

约翰·奥斯丁法哲学再探

约翰·奥斯丁是现代西方法理学中的重要人物,分析法学的创始人,以提出"法律命令说"而著名,他的法哲学长期以来一直受到人们的批判,这些批判主要来自于两大阵营:一是形形色色的自然法学家;另一是一些后起的法律实证主义者。这些批判影响巨大,以致遮蔽了奥斯丁法哲学的本来面目。其实,"法律命令说"并非奥斯丁法哲学的核心与标志,纵使人们批驳倒了"法律命令说",对奥斯丁的法哲学整体来说损害也并不大。奥斯丁的代表性思想是:倡导对法律进行分析性研究,主张建构起一般法理学与法律教义学,最终使法学成为一门科学。在众多的批判之下,奥斯丁的上述代表性思想不仅没有失去生命力,反而保持着旺盛的生命力,以致在现代西方法理学中,奥斯丁仍然是一个人们无法绕过的思想家。     

中国语境中的“司法调解”——一种非标准性阐释

尽管当下司法调解的实践本身比各种话语表述更富创造力,然而一种以"中国"为中心的司法方法论、以"中国"为中心的司法调解观远远未能被我们发现或发明。这至少是因为我们如何评判司法调解与如何表述它皆成了问题。分析这些问题就是在表述:我们的司法调解不是完全经由法律适用来确认权利或利益,而是主要通过实践智慧弥合了公正问题与合法问题,亦即需要解决的争议重点不在于依据哪些法律来裁断,而是借助于转变了裁判者的身份,使其在现行的法律制度内作为调解者来促使纠纷的解决,并以此来追求某种社会公正与社会和谐。     

Opposition Coordination in Singapore’s 2015 General Elections

Abstract

Recent political science scholarship suggests that when opposition political parties are able to coalesce into a united coalition against an authoritarian regime, they will perform better in authoritarian elections, and can more credibly bargain with the regime for liberalising reforms. Yet, most of this literature pays little attention to the variety of ways in which opposition parties cooperate with each other. Drawing on the literature on the bargaining model of war, the author sketches out a theoretical framework to explain how opposition parties coordinate to develop non-competition agreements. Such agreements entail opposition parties bargaining over which political party should contest or withdraw in which constituencies to ensure straight fights against the dominant authoritarian incumbent in each electoral district. The author then applies this framework to explain opposition coordination in Singapore’s 2015 general elections, focusing on the conflict between the Workers’ Party and the National Solidarity Party.     

Singapore’s 2015 General Election: Explaining PAP’s Resounding Win

Abstract

While Singapore’s 15th general election came about as expected, the ensuing results did not. In view of the opposition’s performance in the 2011 general election and the general sense that the ruling party had done well despite its performance being anything but sterling, the results were somewhat shocking. Even the leaders of the ruling party were caught by surprise at the party’s ability to garner 70% of the valid votes, 10% more than in the previous election. While many factors played a role, it was the opposition parties that lost the election rather than the ruling party that won it. Most of the opposition parties were rejected by the voters on grounds of not being worthy of support. The leading opposition party, the Workers’ Party, also suffered as many voters feared that it might perform too well to the detriment of the ruling party. In the end, the 2015 general elections strengthened the one-party-dominant state in Singapore and the quest for greater political representation was placed on the back burner.     

Media–state relations in Burundi: Overview of a post-traumatic media ecology

Through an analysis of the relations between the state and the media in Burundi, this article aims to problematise these actors’ interactions within a context characterised by an asymmetry of power in favour of political authorities and some leeway enjoyed by the media. Through a review of a corpus constituted of scientific literature, reports documenting the situation of press freedom in the country, and newspaper articles, the present article shows that the legal framework governing media activity is rather protective of press freedom, despite some recent setbacks. Under this protective media context, the state uses a variety of devious means to strengthen its grip on the media sector and on journalists. The media, for their part, are obliged to manoeuvre in a post-traumatic context where issues of security have a strong public legitimacy. The article shows that in order to understand relations between the Burundian state and the media, it is necessary to place them in an asymmetrical power context where both face constraints and enjoy spaces of tactical intervention.