诉权的现代转型与民事上诉权之保障

诉权是当事人获得司法救济、实现权利的前提和基础。上诉权是诉权的延伸。为了体现程序的公正性,保证当事人能够自由行使上诉权,确保上诉权行使的结果能够产生预期的制度效果,应当确立不利益变更禁止、民事裁定上诉等制度,允许自由撤诉,取消案件请示制度,严格限制再审程序的启动,从权利行使自由、权利行使空间、权利行使实效等方面对上诉权予以切实的保障。     

论“程序分流”在我国侦查程序中的构建

在我国侦查阶段建立“程序分流”制度不违背诉讼公正原则,符合诉讼经济原则的要求,也符合刑法谦抑原则的发展趋势。我国侦查阶段“程序分流”应注意构建其决定主体、监督主体和参与主体;规定严格的程序以保证该措施不被滥用;确定具体的适用范围和内容等。     

法律全球化与中国诉讼法文化的构建

法律全球化作为一种不可回避的现象,对我国诉讼法文化的冲击远远超越了"中———西"范式,以及简单的"资本主义———社会主义"的意识形态两分法。本文从分析法律全球化的内涵入手,指出法律全球化并不存在西方学者所谓的中心与边缘,而是全世界各主权国家共同参与的进程。在法律全球化的背景下,我国传统诉讼法文化所表现出的"无讼"、"重调解、轻裁判"、"重实体、轻程序"、较强的国家本位主义等特点已不合时宜。面对法律全球化的冲击与挑战,我们应当以积极的态度去研究它,对其再生利用,并从诉讼观念变革、诉讼制度建构和司法方法论研究等三个方面去重塑我国的诉讼法文化。     

法律责任外延探析

我国法理学界对法律责任的外延问题研究较为薄弱,鉴于此,本文便以法律责任的外延为切入点,着重分析了法律责任的三种划分方法,它们的标准分别是,规范法律责任的不同法律部门、特定法律事实对合法权益造成的损害,法律责任的不同承担主体。其中,以“法律部门的不同”为标准对法律责任所作的划分为最重要。就这一划分,作者指出了传统法律责任划分理论在逻辑上的缺陷和价值取向上的偏离,给予了“程序法责任”应有的位置,使程序法责任和实体法责任共同组成法律责任的有机整体。     

An Integrative Perspective on Social Justice: Distributive and Procedural Fairness Evaluations of Positive and Negative Outcome Allocations

This paper presents a theoretical framework for the integration of distributive and procedural justice in positive and negative outcome allocations. The framework consists of seven basic assumptions, seven propositions, and seven groups of interrelated hypotheses. The expected outcome offers a coherent program for future justice research based on the realization that distributive and procedural aspects of fairness cannot be meaningfully treated (1) in isolation from one another, and (2) without taking into account the valence of the allocated outcome. The framework should also reveal the need to reassess existing distributive and procedural justice study conclusions that neglected to examine the interactive effects of the allocation outcome (distribution) and the procedure and the outcome valence.     

关注权力与权利

《行政许可法》的立法工作在进行中。从保护相对人权利和规范行政许可的视角分析 ,其草案至少应完善以下几个方面的内容 :对于行政权利 ,应严格许可权与经营权的分离 ,严格收与支的分离 ;对相对人的程序权利 ,应加强第三人的程序权利 ,应以申辩不影响实体权利来保障申辩权。     

程序性制裁解构 --以刑事程序为范例

随着实体正义到程序正义的流变,程序正义逐步占据了话语主导权,但程序正义却在实践中失范,其中程序性制裁的缺失是重要原因.程序性制裁建构了违反程序的责任后果,维系了程序正义,实现权利的救济.应当在分析程序性制裁的构成要件的基础上,以比较法的视角,对我国本土的程序性制裁制度建构进行解析.     

劳动争议诉讼三题

受我国传统诉讼文化的影响,我国劳动争议适用法律及法律程序设计等方面,都没有能够充分体现出程序正义和程序效益,法律对弱者所给予的救助和支持存在不同程度的弱化。建立社会主义市场经济体制和加入WTO,呼唤尽快完善我国的劳动法制,劳动争议诉讼制度必须从诉讼时效、诉讼证据和诉讼程序方面进行探讨和改革,以更好地维护劳动者的合法权益。     

Engaging the reluctant taxpayer

Abstract

A commitment to political neutrality means that citizens have a legitimate complaint when the coercive power of the state is used to advance some particular conception of how it is good to live. In this paper I investigate how to address this complaint in the case of public funding for the arts. There are two promising ways to justify public arts spending. First, as Thomas Nagel argues, the arts are a source of intrinsic values and so command our respect. I reject this argument because intrinsic values are not automatically political values. Second, Ronald Dworkin argues that access to the arts is required to fully participate in social life. This argument draws a connection between the arts and citizenship and so fares better in establishing a political justification for the arts. However, Dworkin relies on the special value of high art relative to popular art, which undermines the neutrality of his argument. I show that a justification can be given that does not depend on the high value of the arts. I develop an account that shows how the arts can support just relations between citizens. This account is in keeping with a liberal commitment to neutrality.     

Unequal but fair? Cultural recognition and self-government rights

This review of Patten’s Equal Recognition suggests that minority rights can be grounded either in cultural accommodation rights or collective self-government rights. I defend four propositions: (1) individuals’ interests in membership in political communities cannot be reduced to their interests in being able to pursue their own conceptions of the good; (2) liberal states do not have to extend neutrality as equal treatment to self-government claims that intersect with their own jurisdiction; (3) claims for the establishment of public languages and territorial autonomy need to be justified on the basis of self-government rights rather than on grounds of equal treatment of cultural identities; (4) as a condition for their admission, immigrants can be expected to waive collective self-government rights rather than cultural protection rights.