冲突法中自由裁量权的自由与限制——《法律适用法》生效前后之对比

法官自由裁量权对于案件的公正审理、实现实质正义具有极其重要的作用。我国冲突法在保持传统冲突法形式正义价值取向的同时,又对其独尊形式正义的偏颇进行了合理的修正,这种情形在立法上表现为既赋予法官行使自由裁量权的自由,同时又对其进行合理的限制。本文以《中华人民共和国涉外民事关系法律适用法》（以下简称《法律适用法》）的生效为时间界限,从自由和限制两个方面分别对该法以及该法生效之前我国冲突法中关于法官自由裁量权的规定进行介绍、分析和评析,指出《法律适用法》赋予法官自由裁量权的自由更为广泛,对其限制更为合理,体现了我国冲突法在追求形式正义和实质正义之平衡的道路上又取得一定的进步。文章最后还针对《法律适用法》的缺陷提出了完善建议。     

宪法中的战争权

人民主权理论决定了战争决定权应由议会行使。战争宣布权一般属于国家元首。战争指挥权由最高行政长官掌握,是军事统帅权而不是军事统率权。战争执行权主要属于政府及其有关部门。最高军令权和军政权属于总统或首相;此外的军令权属于军官,军政权属于文官,在许多国家二者统属于国防部。在战争的决定权、宣布权、指挥权和执行权中,战争的决定权和指挥权（以及彼此的关系）是最重要的,也是宪法重点规范的对象。     

民事诉讼调解社会化的根据、原则与限度

民事诉讼调解社会化的理论根据是＂司法权的社会性＂,民事诉讼调解社会化为司法权的社会性在市民社会形成过程中的妥当回归提供了可行途径。民事诉讼调解社会化有效地回应了社会力量参与司法的正当诉求,可为法院参与创新社会管理提供宽大的现实舞台。现行《宪法》第123条和第126条能够为民事审判权行使方式的二元化提供合理的解释空间,民事诉讼调解社会化在宪法框架内具有正当性根据。民事诉讼调解社会化不能坐等司法权的强大,其在相势展开的同时应坚持循序渐进原则和有效性标准。     

我国未来应当设立统一的准司法性质的反垄断主管机构

我国《反垄断法》已经施行七年有余,反垄断主管机构基本上沿袭旧制,即仍然由国家工商局、商务部和发改委下设的三个反垄断主管机构进行反垄断执法,只是在其上设置了主要发挥协调、指导作用的国务院反垄断委员会。这种"双层"和"三机构各司其职"的反垄断主管机构的设置有诸多的缺陷,不能很好地履行反垄断的神圣使命。我国未来应当改革现有的反垄断主管机构,设立一个统一的、独立的、高度权威的和准司法性质的反垄断主管机构。     

较大城市立法权探析

较大城市立法权既是计划经济时代的产物,也是为了满足在市场经济条件下进行政治、经济体制改革探索和试验的要求。它在近20余年的进程中,为中央层面的立法提供了丰富的经验,许多全国性的法律都是在较大城市试行成功以后,再向全国推广。但是由于该制度缺乏宪法、法律的规范,以及在监督和规制方面还不是很完善,亟需引起高度重视。     

Britain’s Place in the Contemporary World

This article offers a personal view of Britain’s place in the contemporary world, analysed in terms of five interlocking rings: the traditional three, i.e. relations with the United States, with Europe and the Commonwealth, to which are added the concepts of process and soft power.     

Rethinking Subaltern Resistance

Abstract

This special issue seeks to rethink “resistance” as a critical social science concept in the light of a range of critiques since the 1980s. The five articles in this issue draw their empirical materials from contemporary India, but their arguments have significant implications for those working on other parts of Asia and the world. The articles acknowledge the inherent ambiguities and ambivalences of subaltern resistance in the face of hegemonic social formations, yet, shorn of exoticising and homogenising tendencies, resistance can be reconceptualised as the negotiation rather than negation of social power. Such a reconceptualisation is useful to study a wide range of contentious politics from foot-dragging through protests to social revolutions under a single analytic umbrella. Resistance, in this sense, ought to be recognised as a vital part of a critical realist ontology of society, which helps us understand and critique existing structures of social domination in order to pursue emancipatory possibilities via the generation of social scientific knowledge.     

Coalition Government and Committee Power

Recent research suggests that committees in parliamentary democracies may, at least partly, be endogenous to the prevalence of coalition government. In this article, I examine the conditions under which parliamentary majorities reform legislative rules to expand or reduce committee power. I expect that, ceteris paribus, the greater the conflict inside the governing coalition, the higher the probability that parties in government will adopt reforms expanding committee power and the lower the chance that they will implement changes reducing such power. These expectations are tested using original new data on the reforms of committee agenda powers undertaken in eight European states within 20 years from democratic transition. I find some evidence to support the endogeneity of committee power to the ideological heterogeneity of parliamentary government.     

Data hubris? Humanitarian information systems and the mirage of technology

This article looks at the promise of technology to revolutionise humanitarian action, especially in terms of the gathering and use of data. With many heralding a ‘data revolution’, the opportunities and enthusiasm for using social media and SMS data in crisis response are on the rise. The article constructs an analytical framework in order to scrutinise the three main claims made on behalf of technologically advanced humanitarian information systems: that they can access data more accurately, more quickly, and alter power relations in emancipatory ways. It does so in relation to two aspects of digital humanitarianism: visual technology and crisis mapping, and big data. The article is partly informed by a historical perspective, but also by interview and other material that suggests some of the claims made on behalf of technology are exaggerated. In particular, we argue that the enthusiasm for the data is vastly outstripped by the capacity to meaningfully analyse it. We conclude by scoping the implications of the future technological evolution of humanitarianism, in particular by examining how technology contributes to what Duffield terms ‘post-modern humanitarianism’.