论实行行为的概念

实行行为的概念,作为主张要成立犯罪,首先必须存在该当于特定构成要件之行为的理论,一直以来支配着日本的犯罪论.实行行为,除了作为结果犯中的因果关系的起点行为,被定位于构成要件要素之外,在未遂犯论以及正犯、共犯论中亦发挥着重要作用.然而,近年,实行行为概念受到质疑,甚至有学说倡导实行行为不要说,主张构建不包括实行行为概念的犯罪论.该学说批判,此前的实行行为概念将实行行为本身化为“黑匣子”,是在并未明示实质性价值判断的情形下直接推导出结论,并且,在此概念之下,对于因果关系论、未遂犯论、正犯与共犯论的问题浑然一体地进行研究,有碍于解决这些问题所必需进行的分析性探讨.本文通过回应该批判观点所提出的问题,再次验证实行行为概念的存在意义,进而主张该概念的重要性与必要性.     

禁止内幕交易立法理念转换及其体系效应——从反欺诈到市场诚信

基于反欺诈理念和市场诚信理念所建构的禁止内幕交易法律制度存在根本区别,前者注重保护投资者个人利益,后者则着眼于证券市场诚信的维护,进而导致二者在行为构成要件和法律责任设置等核心规则方面的重大差异。随着证券市场实践的深入发展,反欺诈立法难以克服的功能障碍和结构缺陷日益凸显,造成禁止内幕交易执法和司法实践面临诸多困境,故此逐渐为世界主要经济体所抛弃。顺应国际趋势,以市场诚信维护作为禁止内幕交易制度的立法理念并依此重构制度体系,或能实现逻辑自洽与体系完整,似为提升我国证券市场核心竞争力的应然选择。     

私法概念之再研究——兼论私法观念的革命

私法概念的界定应当从研究市民社会的理论入手,并以家庭、市民社会和政治国家这三者的关系为基础。根据法律的调整对象是否为国家统治关系,可科学地界定私法。这种界定同时也实现了私法观念的革命,产生了新的私法观。对于今日中国的民法法典化而言,这种新的私法观有助于将未来的民法典建成宏伟大厦,而不是将其弄成"三根棒棒";对于民法的理论研究而言,这种新的私法观有助于丰富现有的民法理论,使其更加充实和丰满。     

Small arms,big guns: a dynamic model of illicit market opportunity

Transnational illicit markets are deeply embedded within legal trade systems and thus should be affected by shifting market conditions. Applying a stochastic actor-oriented model (SAOM), this study tests whether variation in illicit market opportunity could account for changing relations within the small arms trade (2003–2008). Measures of market accessibility – changes in export activity, reporting transparency and the percent of the labour force that is armed – outperformed measures of weapon availability with the exception of involvement in armed conflict. Significant structural change in outdegree density and transitivity suggest the development of trade factions, and decreasing balance hints that leaders are emerging. With the pending de-escalation of US-led conflict in the Middle East, a flood of second-hand weaponry is about to enter the market. Continued research is required to further uncover how the legitimate trade infrastructure facilitates the illicit flow of goods.     

Introduction to Weber

Abstract

This article discusses the origins of the speculative configuration that has come to characterize English banking. It criticizes Gerschenkron's view that early nineteenth-century English banking developed relatively autonomously from manufacturing. Pointing out that he misunderstood the specific nature of English finance and the reasons that explained the later shift towards speculation, it shows how Gerschenkron and his followers have consistently underestimated the role of the state in shaping the nature of English finance. The main argument of the article is that state intervention was a decisive factor in shaping the nature of English finance. It proved crucial in initiating the divergence between English and continental finance, and contributed to the rise of modern banking in England. Finally, I argue that the speculative configuration of finance often associated with England was a late development of the nineteenth century that again reflected changes in the form of financial and monetary regulation.     

The ASEAN naval build‐up: Implications for the regional order

This paper examines the ongoing ASEAN force modernization in the light of whether it is stabilizing or destabilizing for the region. Donald K. Emmerson's framework for analysing security regimes — the concentration or dispersion of power in achieving regional order — is employed as a basis for analysis. The paper comes to the conclusion that while the ASEAN arms build‐up will not have a destabilizing effect on the wider Asia‐Pacific regional order or balance, it could have serious implications for ASEAN and Southeast Asia. This is because while the actual increase in the number of weapon systems and platforms is not large, it still constitutes a significant increase in percentage terms, and even more so with regard to capability. Moreover, the ASEAN members are building up their forces at a time when there are no obvious military threats. They are in effect engaged in contingency planning. All these factors could be destabilizing for ASEAN's internal balance. As such, there is a need for ASEAN to address the arms build‐up, and introduce confidence‐building measures. One suggested forum for transparency measures is the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).     

Rethinking the Europe‐Taiwan relationship

This article attempts to construct an overview of Japan's defence problematique in the post‐cold war era. Its approach is to survey the historical legacies that have shaped Japan's defence policies and perceptions, and to assess how these fit, or do not fit, with the new security environment within which Japan now finds itself. The purpose is to argue that a policy of non‐offensive defence (NOD) could solve many of the difficult defence questions that Japan now faces. As a consequence, the discussion will concentrate mainly on military and political issues, mostly leaving aside questions of economic, societal and environmental security on the grounds that these issues interact less strongly with NOD. Section 1 considers the geopolitics of Japan's security that arise from its being an island country. Section 2 analyses some crucial historical considerations, particularly Japan's status as a great power, and the particular circumstances of its historical relationship with its neighbours. Section 3 looks at Japan's position during the cold war, examining how the legacies of its defeat in the Second World War blended into the demands placed upon it as a front‐line ally of the United States against Chinese and Soviet power. Section 4 surveys the actual and possible changes in Japan's security environment consequent upon the ending of the cold war. It focuses on Japan's relationships with the United States, the East Asian region, the international system as a whole, and finally on Japan's relationship with itself. Section 5 considers the requirements for a Japanese defence and security policy in the post‐cold war era.     

国际侦查合作中的特定犯罪不合作原则

国际侦查合作是基于诉讼进程的角度将国际刑事司法合作进行纵向划分所形成的理论范畴,对于其基本原则的研究是建构该理论体系的基础和前提.作为各国参与国际侦查合作的前提条件之一,特定犯罪不合作原则具有重要的基础性意义.在对相关的国际公约、双边条约或协定以及国内法进行比较考察的基础上,运用刑事诉讼法学以及刑法学的基本原理,论证和阐释了特定犯罪不合作原则的由来、特定犯罪范围的确定及其价值功能,并且结合司法实践归纳出特定犯罪不合作原则的发展方向.     

试论法违法所得没收程序的性质及证明标准

新刑事诉讼法设立的违法所得没收程序对于打击贪污贿赂犯罪、恐怖活动犯罪等案件有着重大作用,但是违法所得没收程序的性质和证明标准等基本问题一直存在较大的分歧和争议。虽然违法所得没收程序具有一定的民事诉讼程序色彩,但是其性质不应当归入民事诉讼程序,而应当是刑事诉讼程序。违法所得没收程序的证明标准不应当简单适用刑事诉讼或民事诉讼的证明标准,应当结合违法所得没收程序自身特点,对具体的诉讼主体适用不同的证明标准。     

在客观真实与法律真实之间——新刑事诉讼法证明标准评析

新刑事诉讼法证明标准"事实清楚、证据确实充分"与"排除合理怀疑"并存的规定是司法实践、理论研究与制度探索共同作用下的新规定。尽管学界对新刑事诉讼法证明标准的规定有不同的解读和认知,但两者并存的规定是立法者无奈却又不乏理性的选择,其实质是不再苛求传统的"客观真实"标准,但立法者又不完全信赖司法者对"法律真实"①标准的可控性,因此在司法实践中证明标准是在两者之间。新的证明标准体现了客观标准和主观标准的结合,在证明模式上体现了印证证明与典型自由心证的结合,在证明方向上是正向证明与反向证明的结合。新标准有利于公安司法人员对于证明标准的掌握,有利于法官心证能力的培养和提升,也有利于不被强迫自证其罪原则的实现和刑讯逼供问题的消解。