关于医疗纠纷的法律适用问题

近些年,随着人们法律意识的不断增强,特别是对医疗单位的要求越来越高,使医疗部门成为高风险行业,由此形成了诸多医疗纠纷。如何合理合法的解决好医患纠纷,不仅是医疗机构亟待解决的问题,更是影响到百姓民生的大事情。笔者通过调查实践,从医疗纠纷存在类型、如何选择医疗鉴定、何种情况适用司法鉴定以及适用赔偿标准等方面加以论述。     

法与警：双向度建设“司法警察执法实务”课程

“司法警察执法实务”是高等职业教育司法警务专业的主干课程。从培养目标上看,司法警务专业主要培养适应人民法院、人民检察院警务工作需要的一线应用型人才,同时体现“法”和“警”的行业特征。“法”,是培养目标未来的工作服务对象,“警”,是培养目标未来从事的职业。因此,要建设好“司法警察执法实务”课程乃至司法警务专业,必须立足于“法”和“警”的双重向度,对课程定位、教学内容、实训环节、教学方法等进行系列改革。     

三维视角中的公司章程——以转型时期《公司法》的实施为背景

公司章程是公司的利益相关者在力量均衡的情况下博弈的产物,它通过应然状态和实然状态达到动态的平衡。在中国社会转型的时代背景下,结合《公司法》实施的境况,从三维视角重新审视公司章程有助于发现许多潜在的矛盾与问题。我们应协调公司章程与公司法之间的关系,在全社会树立章程意识,并致力于司法介入机制的完善。     

正确评估《劳动合同法》 适时修改《劳动法》

要客观评价《劳动合同法》,该法对促进劳动力资源市场配置、规范劳动关系发挥了重要作用。目前并没有确切数据证实《劳动合同法》给企业带来不合理用工成本。就用工灵活而言,无固定期限合同是市场经济国家普遍的现象。因为违反规章解除和相关弹性概念的存在,《劳动合同法》的解除保护也并非是彻底刚性的。由于修法的共识并没有形成,相关立法的配套问题没有解决以及经济下行的特殊背景,目前修改《劳动合同法》的时机并不成熟。此外,真正给企业带来负担的是税负等其他因素,修改《劳动合同法》并不能解决企业负担问题。我国劳动关系协调机制的整个问题是集体合同制度不能发挥作用,劳动关系分层处理未能完成。在短期内,解决现有问题应充分发挥司法的能     

Legal change in post-communist states: Contradictions and explanations. Introduction

Reformers had high hopes that the end of communism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union would lead to significant improvements in legal institutions and the role of law in public administration. However, the cumulative experience of 25 years of legal change since communism has been mixed, marked by achievements and failures, advances and moves backward. This special issue of the journal Communist and Post-Communist Studies documents the nuances of this process and starts the process of explaining them. This introductory essay draws on the findings of the articles in this issue to explore the impact of three potential explanatory factors: regime type, international influences, and legal (or political) culture. Regime type matters, but allows for considerable variation within authoritarian and democratic states alike and the possibility of reversals. The influence of international organizations (like the European Union) is also far from predictable, especially once states have joined the organization. Finally, legal cultures and political traditions play a large role in explaining developments in individual countries, but there is nothing inevitable about their impact.     

Constitutional courts as veto players: Lessons from the United States,France and Germany

The number of constitutional courts and supreme courts with constitutional review rights has strongly increased with the third wave of democratisation across the world as an important element of the new constitutionalism. These courts play an important role in day‐to‐day politics as they can nullify acts of parliament and thus prevent or reverse a change in the status quo. In macro‐concepts of comparative politics, their role is unclear. Either they are integrated as counter‐majoritarian institutional features of a political system or they are entirely ignored: some authors do not discuss their potential impact at all, while others dismiss them because they believe their preferences as veto players are entirely absorbed by other actors in the political system. However, we know little about the conditions and variables that determine them as being counter‐majoritarian or veto players. This article employs the concept of Tsebelis’ veto player theory to analyse the question. It focuses on the spatial configuration of veto players in the legislative process and then adds the court as an additional player to find out if it is absorbed in the pareto‐efficient set of the existing players or not. A court which is absorbed by other veto players should not in theory veto new legislation. It is argued in this article that courts are conditional veto players. Their veto is dependent on three variables: the ideological composition of the court; the pattern of government control; and the legislative procedures. To empirically support the analysis, data from the United States, France and Germany from 1974 to 2009 is used. This case selection increases variance with regard to system types and court types. The main finding is that courts are not always absorbed as veto players: during the period of analysis, absorption varies between 11 and 71 per cent in the three systems. Furthermore, the pattern of absorption is specific in each country due to government control, court majority and legislative procedure. Therefore, it can be concluded that they are conditional veto players. The findings have at least two implications. First, constitutional courts and supreme courts with judicial review rights should be systematically included in veto player analysis of political systems and not left aside. Any concept ignoring such courts may lead to invalid results, and any concept that counts such courts merely as an institutional feature may lead to distorted results that over‐ or under‐estimate their impact. Second, the findings also have implications for the study of judicial politics. The main bulk of literature in this area is concerned with auto‐limitation, the so‐called ‘self‐restraint’ of the government to avoid defeat at the court. This auto‐limitation, however, should only occur if a court is not absorbed. However, vetoes observed when the court is absorbed might be explained by strategic behaviour among judges engaging in selective defection.     

Judicial independence and state-business relations: the case of Taiwan’s ordinary courts

The question of how ordinary courts in new and emerging democracies may gain judicial independence remains an understudied subject compared to its constitutional court counterpart. Through a case study of Taiwan, this article adopts and expands upon the concept of power diffusion from the extant literature, arguing that the growing power of Taiwan’s private corporate sector led the dominant political party Kuomintang (KMT) to grant independence to the ordinary courts as a means to check against this threat, because the excessive rent-seeking and corruption brought about by these empowered corporations were threatening the nation’s successful economic model and its rule of law. Also, due to the corporate sector’s growing influence on the ruling party itself, the KMT leadership had to devise strategies that can credibly commit to ordinary court independence, which would otherwise be reversed thereafter. This unique implication guides a qualitative empirical analysis that reinterprets the historical events surrounding the judicial reforms that took place in the mid-1990s. The results yield strong evidence in support of the theory.     

Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights regime

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.     

以审判为中心的庭审模式对法医出庭质证的挑战

以审判为中心的庭审模式是当今诉讼改革的主要方向,案件庭审实质化是诉讼改革的主要目标,在此背景下,法医鉴定人出庭质证将会实质化、常态化。为此,最高人民法院等部门出台了保障鉴定人出庭的相关规定、规则。法医鉴定意见质证实质化要求法医鉴定人在出庭时履行相关义务:尊重法庭、如实回答提问、释明鉴定意见。当前法医参加庭审质证中存在法医鉴定人出庭率低、鉴定意见的法律性质不明确、鉴定人出庭的具体要求不明确、与包括专家辅助人在内的其他专家证据形式的冲突等问题。为此,笔者向法医鉴定人提出三点建议:不断学习,提升专业技能;加强修炼,提高法律知识;注重实践,强化表达能力。     

Where to Draw the Line? Is Efficiency Encroaching on a Fair Justice System?

The government is currently implementing an ambitious agenda of reforms to transform the justice system of England and Wales. The stated aim is to improve efficiency, primarily by utilising technology and bringing processes online where possible. The speed and ambition of the programme has led to concerns that the drive for efficiency is coming at the expense of ensuring a fair and effective justice system. This article suggests that the fundamental principles underpinning our justice system are at risk of being lost in the push for increased efficiency. It focuses on two specific proposals: increasing the use of video links, thus moving to virtual hearings as the default position for the majority of cases; and of automating the conviction process in certain criminal cases. It is argued that both proposals undermine the role of an independent judiciary in making fair and transparent decisions.