Assessing the EU’s Transatlantic Regulatory Powers Using the Choice of Policy Instruments as Measurement of Preference Attainment

To what extent is the European Union (EU) exercising global regulatory power? This article investigates this question through a comparative study of two significant global policy fields: data-protection and banking with a special focus on the choice of policy instruments. Both cases suggest that the actual role of the EU is more complex than either exercising or being subjected to global regulatory power. This concerns not only the relationship between the EU and the member-states. The article suggests that the EU is in a better position to conclude global regulatory deals when the negotiating competencies sit with one EU institutional actor.     

中国古代刑讯制度及其评析

刑讯作为野蛮的“刑”与文明的“讯”结合而成的取证方法,在中国古代延续了两千余年,这一方面反映了其不足之处,另一方面却又足以说明了其价值所在。因此,不顾其存在的客观历史奈件而简单地对其功过一概否定或者肯定的观点都是值得商榷的。本文从中国古代刑讯制度的沿革入手,就古代中国刑讯制度化、法律化的形成、原因、特点等诸多相关问题予以了阐述,目的在于客观地评价中国古代的刑讯制度,从而扬“讯”之长,避“刑”之短,以完善今天的证据制度。     

The use of warnings in the presence of errors

This article studies the effects of warnings, an enforcement instrument which is often used by environmental inspection agencies. Due to regulatory errors, measured emissions are uncertain and some firms are unjustly penalized. Warnings can then be used as a means to reduce the consequences of these errors. Even though the presence of warnings creates some underdeterrence of medium-cost firms, such a system reduces the overcompliance of low-cost firms caused by the uncertainty surrounding measured emissions. Further, warnings reduce the number of incorrect prosecutions in the case of measurement errors, which is also welfare enhancing, albeit at the cost of increasing the number of violators that go unpunished. For small error sizes, the use of warnings is shown to be welfare improving compared to only using fines.     

Administrative Discretion and Environmental Regulation: Agency Substantive Rules and Court Decisions in U.S. Air and Water Quality Policies

The main challenge of the scholarship with administrative discretion is how to reach the appropriate balance between a commitment to legislative preferences and flexibility in regulating diverse targets in constantly changing environments. This article focuses on how regulators and courts interact in influencing the potential for administrative discretion in U.S. environmental policy. It creates an analytical framework highlighting the construction of substantive rules by an agency, the interpretation of agency rulings by courts, capacity of an agency for implementation, and legislative responsiveness to agency rulings. It analyzes several cases of the introduction of incentive-based economic instruments administered by the Environmental Protection Agency in air and water policies. The cases reveal the intensified and expanded production of substantive regulations by the agency and the trajectory of a struggle in the judiciary to advance both the legislative intent and the substantive goal of protecting the environment in a more cost-effective and less burdensome way.     

非法供证排除机制之完善

刑讯逼供等非人道、不文明的供证收集行为早已为现代法治国家严格禁止。非法供证不具有证据资格已是通行作法。但在我国,刑讯逼供等非法获取供证的行为在刑事侦查中久禁不绝。推究产生这一现象的原因,就是通过刑迅逼供等非法行为获得的供证大量地被作为证据加以使用。这一症结之一在于目前对于认定非法供证的机关机制建构不足。本文就这些重要的协调和保障机制予以揭示,以期望我国的非法供证排除能有所起色。     

思想·制度·工具——美国国家安全体系的一种分析框架

各国国家安全体系建设的相关经验,可以为总体国家安全观指导下的中国国家安全体系建设提供参考和借鉴。国家安全体系一般都有一些必不可少的基本构成要素,但由于各国历史文化、内外环境和发展需求等方面的差异,这些要素的演变历程、具体内容和实际作用可能大不相同。作为超级大国,美国拥有最为庞大、完备且富于自身特色的国家安全体系。这个体系主要由指导思想、法律制度和保障工具三类要素构成。其指导思想是维护全球性主导地位,并带有绝对安全倾向;决策机制既遵循一套完整的跨部门分级流程,也涉及各种非正式决策模式;法律制度与监管机制系统完备;保障工具与手段多样有力,包括超强的军事能力与联盟体系、强大的经济实力与情报体系以及广泛的社会基础。然而,作为一个在冷战中形成的"安全化国家",美国的安全目标与手段、资源之间存在持续张力;空前庞大的国家安全体系也会受到内外条件的制约,经常陷入能力捉襟见肘、行为进退失据的境地;尽管在国际体系中拥有显著的"权力优势",美国同样面临发展利益与安全利益之间的矛盾。