善治目标下的我国信访制度改革

善治是建立在政府与公民社会合作基础上的社会管理模式。信访是我国社会主义公民政治参与的重要渠道,需要政府与公民的广泛合作。以善治为目标推进信访制度改革,是构建社会主义和谐社会的必然要求,是人民群众的迫切愿望,也是政府管理的内在要求,因此是我国信访制度改革的目标和方向。     

因"好意同乘"引发的侵权责任分析——以侵权法的归责原则为视角

现实社会中,好意同乘现象极为普遍,而因好意同乘引发的道路交通事故人身损害赔偿纠纷也时有出现,但相关法律规定的缺失使得法官在审理此类案件中时常陷入困境。有鉴于此,理清和明确无偿搭乘人因交通事故遭受人身损害的赔偿问题无论在理论上还是司法实践中均属必要。立法应在审视一般社会观点后,在激励好意同乘的价值导向下对其认定标准予以规范,明确归责原则及减责事由,并区分运行人的过错程度,根据同乘者的过失情况正确适用过失相抵原则。     

近十年来羌族文化研究综述

羌族是我国最古老的民族之一,近年来对羌族文化的研究取得了一定成果。在羌族的思想宗教文化以及民俗文化研究比如释比、婚葬之俗研究方面有很大成就。但亦有不足之处,如时羌族遗址文化的研究较少,较强专业性的著作不多,对于羌族的剪纸等民族传统工艺文化的研究也较欠缺。     

The Insurance Act 2015: Rebalancing the Interests of Insurer and Assured

The Insurance Act 2015 is the first piece of legislation since the eighteenth century to seek to lay down new principles governing the formation and operation of insurance contracts. Exactly 250 years after Lord Mansfield articulated the routinely‐cited principle of utmost good faith in insurance law in Carter v Boehm (1766) 2 Burr 1905, that principle has been recast, with important implications for both the pre‐ and post‐contractual duties of the parties. The Insurance Act has also imposed important restrictions on the enforcement of policy terms by insurers, and clarifies the law affecting fraudulent claims. The Marine Insurance Act 1906, a codifying measure, looks increasingly outmoded.     

刑法的认同:问题、方法及机制——由一个重婚习俗引发的思考

在青海省的回族和撒拉族聚居区,近年来重婚习俗重新抬头,致使《刑法》第258条在该地区无法得到普遍认同。在刑法获得认同的方法上长期以来所坚持的规则论与决断论相结合的思维模式,无法实现刑法与民间规则的有效对话,且易在解决刑法认同问题上制造障碍。从青海省回族和撒拉族聚居区重婚习俗的运行情况来看,引入具体秩序论的思维,通过司法在国家制定法与民间规则之间建立沟通机制,是刑法获得认同的重要途径,同时也表明刑法认同在本质上首先应当是一种文化认同。     

Diasporic citizenship and militarization: Punjabi soldiers in the world wars

This article delves into the uses of history and examines how the enlisting of Indian soldiers – particularly from Punjab – into the British Indian Army during the First and Second World Wars has been memorialized and remembered in contemporary Britain. This issue has become particularly salient in the light of the politics of the so-called ‘war on terror’ or ‘new imperialism’, which Paul Gilroy and Vron Ware argue has heightened tendencies towards militarism in British society. Using examples from the public sphere – remembrance day events, TV documentaries and army recruitment fairs – as well as interview material, I argue that Britain's Punjabi communities have been organizing in order to weave themselves into the national tapestry by memorializing role played by Punjabis in the First and Second World Wars – iconic to the national fantasy, using this forgotten history to demand recognition from the state and stake a claim for citizenship. In the ‘new imperialism’, however, it is not equally possible for Sikh and Muslim Punjabis to argue for their inclusion on the terms of militarized citizenship, and the various chords within the diaspora seem to be increasingly disharmonious, effacing their composite and shared colonial history.     

试析诸善冲突的根源和意义

所谓“诸善冲突”是指在人们意欲的各种好东西之间存在着对立抵触.由于它导致了人们只有通过取舍选择才有可能以放弃某种善为代价实现另一种善,从而形成善恶之间不可分割的紧密交织,结果就迫使人们不仅要诉诸善恶好坏的价值标准,而且还要诉诸是非对错的价值标准,并且从根本上决定了人的存在无法摆脱的内在有限性.     

从真实权利人角度审视善意取得制度

善意取得制度,作为一项国家立法的政策取向,在通说以及我国的立法中,是以牺牲真实权利人的利益为基础来保证交易的安全和便捷,从而维护善意第三人的利益.而对于真实权利人而言,最直观的一点是对已有的物权的丧失,让真实权利人的利益受到了损害.应站在真实权利人角度,从另一个视角审视善意取得制度.     

Understanding South Africa's foreign policy: the perplexing case of Zimbabwe

Many who have admired the African National Congress are confused and dismayed by post-apartheid South Africa's foreign policy on human rights and good governance, exemplified by its most important policy test to date, viz. Zimbabwe. It is argued below that understanding this policy in terms of the widely-used explanation that it represents ‘a shift from idealism to realism’ is unsatisfactory. This state-centric framework, focused on ‘national’ interests and ideals cannot accommodate the wide range of interests, ideals, and other factors that shape the policy. Instead, this investigation assumes that all foreign policies involve a close interaction between ‘realism’ (interest-driven analysis) and ‘idealism’ (beliefs/values-driven analysis). In addition to exploring this interaction, this paper also touches briefly and tentatively on the following questions: how well has South Africa's foreign policy been calculated and implemented, and what have been its effects and consequences for South Africa, Zimbabwe, and the ‘progressive’ international norms to which both South Africa and many of its critics subscribe. A subsidiary aim is to clarify some misunderstandings between South Africa and the West that frequently lead to their ‘talking past each other’ on this, and other, issues of human rights and good governance.     

A critical understanding of good governance and leadership concepts written in the context of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) and the challenges to contextual discourse on Africa's development paradigms1

ABSTRACT

Good governance is a value-laden concept that is characteristically nebulous; it can mean different things to different people, depending on the context in which it is used. The same applies to leadership. Concepts, as Pauw (1999a, 465) puts it, are ‘tools of thinking’ and contexts are ‘the environments or frameworks in which they [concepts] operate’. Lucidity in the meanings of concepts is fundamentally important for shaping debate and enriching discourses. To maintain their power, concepts must be used in their proper contexts. This necessitates an understanding of the art of contextual discourse. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle and emphasised as a sine qua non for sustainable development in Africa. On the other hand, NEPAD premises Africa's re-birth or Renaissance on good governance and leadership, with a vision and commitment to repositioning the continent in global power balances. In this article good governance and leadership are considered as concepts. NEPAD is a textual context within which the two key concepts are used and should, consequently, be engaged. The article attempts a critical review of African scholarship engagement with good governance and leadership within the NEPAD context to determine the extent to which contextual discourse is practised. It further grapples with the immediate historical background to scholarship on Africa's development between the 1960s and early 1990s. The exercise reveals that much of the accumulated body of African scholarship and scholarship on Africa's development reviewed does not suffciently contextualise discourse on good governance and leadership within NEPAD, and its key assessment and monitoring device, the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), and offers an alternative framework.