道路交通事故责任认定行为的可诉性探讨

认定交通事故责任,是处理交通事故中专业性很强的工作,其认定主体的特定性和权威性,体现在相对一方当事人没有其他选择余地的只能由公安交通管理部门,根据法律法规授权作出的一种行政行为。该责任认定行为直接关系到当事人是否构成犯罪以及承担民事赔偿责任的问题。对道路交通事故责任的认定不服,根据行政诉讼法的立法宗旨,以及行为对相对人权利和义务的影响,应当提起行政诉讼。     

人民法院对收养行为的审查权探析

收养必须符合收养成立的实质要件,并同时履行收养法定程序,才能产生法律效力。我国收养法规定收养以向县级以上人民政府民政部门办理登记为形式要件,没有规定人民法院对收养行为的审查权,这与我国港、澳、台地区收养制度存在冲突,与世界主要发达国家对收养的国家监督主义色彩日渐浓厚的趋势不相吻合。立法上有必要明确赋予人民法院对收养行为的审查权,取消收养登记机关宣告收养无效的权力。     

交通肇事罪若干问题研究——兼析有关交通肇事司法解释

随着我国经济持续、快速地发展 ,人民生活水平不断提高 ,个人拥有机动车辆的比例迅速攀升 ,随之而来的形形色色的交通事故、交通肇事行为也层出不穷 ,原有的 1997年刑法所规定的交通肇事罪的相关内容已无法满足司法实践的客观需要。为此 ,最高人民法院审判委员会出台了《关于审理交通肇事刑事案件具体应用法律若干问题的解释》 ,本文将就该解释出台后所引发的一些问题进行研究和探讨。     

浅谈公安交通管理专业综合实战技能训练

公安交通管理专业综合实战训练将过去交通管理各门专业课程训练独立运作、条块分割的形式取消,将公安交通管理专业技能进行有效规范、整合,对学生进行集中的综合性、系统性、连贯性训练。通过综合实战技能训练使实战性、可操作性、综合性、全面性的原则真正在教学环节中得以体现,从而更好地实现和达到使学生进一步增强在道路交通管理工作中的动手操作能力、解决实际问题的实践能力和对各类问题的综合判断能力。     

试论基于“路权”的交通肇事过错划分

路权是对现行道路交通安全管理法规中所规定的通行权、先行权、占用权等交通权利的概括及其总称。路权原则常被用作分析交通参与者的交通行为的合法性 ,是交通违章处罚和交通事故责任认定工作中的重要理论工具。然而 ,路权原则在交通安全管理的研究与实践中往往被滥用 ,这在交通事故责任认定中表现得尤为突出     

证人出庭作证问题研究

证人出庭作证是保证司法公正的基本措施。针对我国司法实践中普通存在的证人拒绝出庭作证的现象 ,有必要从转变司法观念 ,建立强制证人出庭作证制度 ,完善证人保护制度 ,贯彻直接言词原则 ,建立证人特权制度等方面 ,有效解决证人出庭作证的问题。     

MEDIATING JUDICIAL POLICY

Despite the widespread use of mediation to resolve public policy disputes, there is little written on the mediation of judicial rule disputes. A successful mediation of a dispute over proposed court rules to govern mediation of certain family law cases involving domestic violence concerns is reviewed. The authors conclude that the mediation provided (a) a confidential venue for disputing judges to respectfully disagree with one another, (b) an opportunity for collaborative problem solving, (c) an opportunity to reduce conflict among judicial colleagues. (d) a format for dialogue with other stakeholders, and (e) greater degree of influence with regard to the outcome of the dispute. Specific recommendations to encourage the effective use of judicial policy mediation are offered.     

The forensic investigation of vehicle–pedestrian collisions: A review

Rapid urbanisation, a steady increase in the number of vehicles, speeding, negligence in road safety, and other factors have led to the inevitable worldwide growth of road traffic accidents involving pedestrians. According to the ‘Global Status Report on Road Safety’ released by the World Health Organization, road traffic collisions are one of the leading causes of death for people of all ages, with approximately 1.35 million road fatality deaths occurring globally each year. Figures from the report also highlight that a large part of road deaths involves pedestrians as the most vulnerable road users. Therefore, forensic examination of vehicle–pedestrian collisions has become increasingly important in the detection, investigation and reduction of road casualties and permanent development of this discipline is urgently needed. Thus, this article aims to review the capability and effectiveness of forensic examination in tackling road fatalities and explores the most important aspects of this discipline, such as nature of a vehicle–pedestrian collision, common issues resolved by this type of examination and typical physical evidence used in the reconstruction of vehicle–pedestrian collisions. Moreover, the paper outlines the latest advances and approaches in the field.     

十八届四中全会司法改革新举措之解读

党的十八届四中全会《决定》明确了一系列司法改革新举措,对司法体制改革作出新的重大部署。最高人民法院设立巡回法庭,探索设立跨行政区划的人民法院和人民检察院,建立领导干部干预司法活动、插手具体案件处理的记录、通报和责任追究制度,从制度和体制上防范和禁止地方行政权力干涉,保障审判权、检察权依法独立行使;推进以审判为中心的诉讼制度改革,实行审判权和执行权相分离体制,探索建立检察机关提起公益诉讼制度,实行立案登记制,从司法权运行机制和职能定位上强化司法权威,促进公正司法,保障国家和公民权益。     

Moral wrongfulness and insanity: a New Zealand sample

Introduction: This study sought to identify the common characteristics amongst defendants found legally insane, compared to those who were psychiatrically evaluated yet convicted of their crime. Method: A retrospective review of court-ordered psychiatric court reports and legal outcomes was conducted, for all defendants referred for insanity evaluations in the largest city in New Zealand (and its surrounding rural regions) for a 7-year period. Results: The majority (60%; 37) of those referred for evaluation were found legally insane. The opinion regarding moral wrongfulness was the single factor that differentiated successful insanity defendants from those who were found guilty. Conclusions: Despite the centrality of the insanity defence to forensic psychiatry, few studies internationally consider characteristics of those found insane, particularly in comparison with those who are found guilty. Psychiatrically evaluated defendants in this sample were relatively homogenous, perhaps due to the court liaison nurse screening process.