公共财政与财税法律制度的构建

公共财政是构建财税法律制度的基石。公共财政的核心,是满足社会公共之需要,其本质是纳税人有权在国家经济活动中参与决策、参与管理、参与监督。推进和完善财税法律制度建设,应当重视财政民主、财政法定、财政平等、财政健全等原则,从而实现财税法律制度的和谐。     

见危救助义务的正当性分析

我国尚无关于见危救助义务的立法,从欧美国家的立法来看,对见危救助义务持有截然不同的态度。见危救助义务的法律化可以从三个方面得到论证:被救助人基于人权有权获得救助,救助人基于社群责任有义务提供救助,而基于以上两个前提救助义务的法律化并不存在重大理论障碍,也并非对个人自由的侵犯。     

Rethinking the one-stop-shop mechanism: Legal certainty and legitimate expectation

This paper aims to contribute to the discussion concerning the one-stop-shop mechanism proposed in the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter “GDPR”). The choice of regulation as the instrument to legislate on data protection is already an unmistakable indication that unification and simplification (together with respect of data subjects' interests) shall be the guide for every legal discussion on the matter. The one-stop-shop mechanism (hereinafter “OSS”) clearly reflects the unification and simplification which the reform aims for. We believe that OSS is logically connected with the idea of one Data Protection Authority (hereinafter “DPA”) with an exclusive jurisdiction and that this can only mean that, given one controller, no other DPA can be a competent authority.² In other words, OSS implies a single and comprehensive competent authority of a given controller. In our analysis we argue that such architecture: a) works well with the “consistency mechanism”; b) provides guarantees to data subjects for a clear allocation of powers (legal certainty); and c) is not at odds with the complaint lodging procedure. Our position on fundamental questions is as follows. What is the perimeter of competence of the DPA in charge? We believe that it should have enforcement power on every issue of the controller, including issuing the fines. How to reconcile such dominant role of one DPA with the principle of co-operation among DPAs? We do not consider co-operation at odds with the rule that decisions are taken by just one single authority. Finally, we share some suggestions on how to make the jurisdiction allocation mechanism (the main establishment criterion) more straightforward.     

Tarasoff in Missouri: The jurisprudence of a mental health provider's duty to warn and protect non-patients of potential risks from patients

In 1976, the Supreme Court of California issued its well-known Tarasoff Principle. From this principle, other courts found a duty to warn, and some found more than just a duty to warn, a duty to protect. As courts in other states adopted a version of the Tarasoff Principle, they issued a wide variety of third-party liability rules. In light of the dynamic, everchanging Tarasoff jurisprudence in the United States and recent relevant appellate court opinion in Missouri, a timely updated summary and update of Tarasoff-related jurisprudence in Missouri is warranted. In the present analysis, we compiled the four appellate court decisions that pertained to the questions of Tarasoff-like third-party liability in the State of Missouri: Sherrill v. Wilson (1983), Matt v. Burrell (1995), Bradley v. Ray (1995), and Virgin v. Hopewell (2001). We reviewed all legal measures for clinicians to protect nonpatients in Missouri, not just those that relate to protecting nonpatients from violence as in a Tarasof-like scenario. Thus, this paper concisely provides a compendium of such options and allows for a meaningful comparison of which legal, protective measures are mandatory and which are permissive, thereby evoking the question of whether measures of protecting nonpatients from a patient's violent acts ought to be mandatory duties or permissive application of professional judgment.     

陈正人对创建井冈山革命根据地的主要贡献

陈正人是井冈山革命根据地的创始人之一。在井冈山斗争时期,他曾参与领导万安暴动,先后担任遂川县委书记和湘赣边特委副书记,领导遂川人民和湘赣边区开展武装斗争、建立民主政权、实行土地革命、进行党的建设,坚持正确的革命路线。红军主力下山后,他留在井冈山继续坚持斗争。他对井冈山革命根据地的创建和发展作出了重大贡献。     

促进教育公平发展 夯实和谐社会基础

教育公平是社会公平的重要内容之一,在构建和谐社会中具有不可替代的基础性推动作用。文章结合中国的国情,通过对教育公平的界定及在和谐社会视野下对教育公平现状分析的基础上,提出了促进教育公平、构建和谐社会的对策与建议。     

军事法价值论

军事法价值是包含着人的价值预期的军事法,在与人发生相互作用的过程中所表现出的对人的作用;军事法价值的要素包括主体、客体和要素三个方面;价值取向就是在价值方面的选取方向和目的性追求,我国军事法的价值取向包括三个方面的内容,即文明、责任和道德。     

短视频作品的著作权保护

短视频行业的快速发展必然带来短视频作品著作权保护的问题。就防止短视频作品著作权侵权而言,从普通用户到短视频平台等网络服务提供者,其所负担的义务内容和程度从根本上来说与其他类型的网络作品的相关内容区别不大,不同之处在于这种新形式的消费潮流尚缺乏专门用来应对的相关法律和措施,因此探讨短视频作品的著作权侵权及其保护,为各方主体提供注意义务参考和针对短视频作品著作权保护提出建议,对保障文化产业的发展意义重大。     

The Negligence Standard: Political Not Metaphysical

This contribution distinguishes two kinds of responsibility: the basic (or ‘metaphysical’) kind that we all inescapably have as functioning human beings; and the assignable (or ‘political’) kind that connects each of us with some particular tasks, and not with others. Having explored some differences between the two, and in particular the role of law's authority in connection with each, the discussion turns to the negligence standard, especially but not only as it figures in tort law. Recently, several philosophers have attempted to find a role for the negligence standard in the metaphysics of basic responsibility. This contribution resists that development and stands up for the traditional lawyer's view that the negligence standard belongs to the pliable politics of assignable responsibility. Basic responsibility, it is argued, is fundamentally strict.