二层次四要件犯罪构成论——兼议正当化行为的体系地位

以解决正当化行为在犯罪论体系中地位不定,及其与犯罪构成关系不明为突破口;以反映定罪过程、权力与权利的平衡以及对抗制的诉讼程序特点为价值立场;兼顾中国已有的理论与实务情况,主张在我国犯罪构成论的应有结构为两层次四要件犯罪构成结构.此即:第一层次,三个要件,依次为犯罪客观要件、犯罪主体要件和犯罪主观要件;第二层次为犯罪客体一个要件,其中,正当化行为等作为排除犯罪客体的事由在此纳入犯罪构成要件之中.无此事由,犯罪即告成立.     

国际海运立法中分化与协调的百年变奏——以海上货物运输承运人责任制度为视角

承运人责任制度是国际海上货物运输法律制度的核心,其发生、发展与变革无不取决于国际贸易、航海技术、运输方式等因素.基于此,我们认为:在未来的一个相当长的时期内,过失责任制应该得到维系,在过失责任制下,免责事项将逐渐醇化,举证责任将根据航运实践的特点予以合理分配,承运人的赔偿责任亦将继续得到适当的限制,从而使过失责任制得到彻底的贯彻.     

Four Lessons for Developing Countries from the Trade Negotiations Over Access to Medicines

After the Agreement on the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) came into operation in 1995 developing countries have found themselves in a process of continual negotiation over intellectual property rights and access to medicines. These negotiations have taken place in the World Trade Organization and in the context of free trade agreements. The paper suggests that the only real win for developing countries has been the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health in 2001. What have been the lessons for developing countries in a decade of negotiations over access to medicines? Drawing on themes of rule complexity and regulatory ritualism the paper discusses four key lessons for developing countries. It concludes by arguing that developing countries will do better if they adopt a networked governance approach to negotiation rather than continuing to rely on traditional coalition formation.     

论边缘儿童产生的成因及其游戏治疗

边缘儿童是在普通学前教育机构中,游离于集体边缘、言行举止介于正常与异常边缘的儿童.生态系统的失衡是导致边缘儿童产生的根本原因,家庭生态的失衡是儿童边缘化的诱因,同伴欠缺加剧了儿童的边缘化倾向,教师忽视加深了儿童边缘化的程度.游戏是帮助边缘儿童表达问题的重要途径,游戏治疗具有改善边缘儿童现状的功能.通过创设满足儿童需要的新环境,改善与修复已有的生态环境,以"家长参与"、"同伴介入"、"教师关注"等干预方式,修复或改善边缘儿童的生态环境系统,使边缘儿童的问题得以缓解或消除,使边缘儿童因顺应生态系统的平衡而逐渐回归到正常的同伴群体.     

A SHORT COMMENTARY ON TIMOTHY M. TIPPINS AND JEFFREY P. WITTMANN'S "EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS

In this commentary, the call for clinical humility and judicial vigilance in custody recommendations is confirmed as valid and the Australian experience, where the child custody report writer has for some years been permitted to express an opinion on the ultimate issue, is considered. The inherent risks are briefly discussed, and the question of who of the judge and the social scientist might be better placed to decide the exquisitely difficult children's issues after family breakdown is touched upon. It suggests that a combination of the expert's opinion and judicial fact finding probably produces a result that is as good as it gets. But a greater danger is highlighted. It is the impact of the adversary system, and whether it is suitable in any event to these sensitive court decisions.     

建立统一公法学的时代意义——兼答“统一公法学”可能遭遇的质疑

建立统一公法学,既契合了特定的时代背景,更将产生重大的时代意义。建立统一公法学的时代背景:一是权力分立的铁律被突破,权力交叉的趋势在加强;二是国家社会一体化解体,社会公权力快速成长;三是学科的细化在加剧,学科的综合在并进。建立统一公法学的时代意义:一是有利于提炼规范国家公权力的基本规律,完善对公权力的整体调整;二是有利于研究公法面临的新问题,克服传统公法学研究的盲点;三是有利于加强公法基础理论研究,完善公法学科体系。建立统一公法学,并非否定权力分立的宪政原则,并非为了部门公法学的自身利益,并不违背学科发展的基本趋势。     

A New Use for Practitioners in Teaching Negotiation

This article examines the role that practitioners as guest lecturers have traditionally played in the teaching of negotiation. The authors argue that, as seen from the perspective of student learning, this traditional role has not utilized the practitioner's expertise and experience to an optimal degree. Because of this, they have redesigned the role of the practitioner as guest lecturer in their negotiation course. They describe this new role in some detail. Their goal is to encourage students to understand how and why integrative negotiation techniques can work beyond the classroom in what students call the "real world."     

论和谐社会视野下的政府职能体系

构建社会主义和谐社会,是在新形势下提高党的执政能力、贯彻落实科学发展观和推进我国经济社会发展的战略举措。从系统论的角度看,社会系统要实现整体和谐,获得良性的运行和发展,必须构建一个政府职能体系。本文在深入研究政府职能体系结构的基础上,重点论述了如何构建政府职能体系。     

法治政府及模型演进

依法治国 ,是我们建设社会主义法治国家的政治方略。要建设法治国家 ,首先就要致力于构建法治政府 ,这既是法治国家的实现手段 ,又是法治国家的重要组成部分。本文从历史的角度回顾了法治政府的相关形态 ,指出了我国进行法治政府建设应该适用的模型     

美国的“政治大棒”与德国的法律程序——后“9·11”时代,美德反恐国际合作第一案之解读

"9·11"事件后,德美看似亲密的反恐合作关系却在德国法院审判"9·11"事件中的国际恐怖嫌疑分子穆特萨迪格和穆祚迪案中陷入了困境。两国政府在反恐策略上的差异为这两个案件的结局规定了方向。德国政府部门拒绝向德国法院提供关键证据,损害了德国检察官的指控能力。美国政府拒绝与德国法院合作,则直接冒犯了德国法院的自尊。由于审判是在德国民众反对美国入侵伊拉克以及阿尔布莱格监狱丑闻之爆发的背景下进行的,德国公共舆论同情被告人,积极影响并支持了法院的判决。这两个案件可以视为德国法院及民众对布什政府所实施的反恐策略的一次大审判,判决结果是布什政府败诉。