公安工作为创建区域和谐社会公共安全而努力

公安工作与构建社会主义和谐社会相适应,首要的是认识和观念问题。为此,要深刻认识构建社会主义和谐社会的重大意义,理解社会主义和谐社会作为一种社会理想的重大理论和实践价值。在此基础上,通过确立公安工作为创建区域和谐社会公共安全而努力的警务战略,具体按照强化一种观念、明确一种战略、增强一种能力、选择一条路径、坚持一种模式等“五个一”要求,实现公安工作尤其是公安基层基础工作与构建和谐社会这一时代主题相适应、相一致。     

诉讼时效在保障工商业文明社会信用体系中的核心价值--诉讼时效基本理论的反思与我国诉讼时效立法的重新选择(二)

农耕文明的自然经济和熟人社会特点决定了农耕文明社会成员之间信用的不发达,信任得以天然维系,无需诉讼时效制度对信用加以保护,诉讼时效即无从产生.而工商业文明的商品经济和陌生人社会,则是产生大量信用,社会成员信息不畅.为了保障任何第三人不至于因债权人突然行使产生于年代久远而处于休眠状态的权利而受损,有必要设置诉讼时效制度切断久远的债权债务关系影响到对当事人财产信用的评价,维护债权信用体系.诉讼时效通过其独有的弱化甚至消灭权利的功能维持了整个社会的债权信用,尽可能保障一般社会的交易安全.这即是诉讼时效的制度基础之所在.     

历史视野中民法的“多彩人像”

对“民法上人”的特点或称“色彩”的假设是民法制度展开及其正当性的基础。罗马法上的人具有多神社会中“家”的祭司和二元社会中“家”的主权者双重色彩。近代民法上的人像包括人是“主体”的世界、抽象理性人、孤立的“经济人”三重色彩,其底色——对理性和人性的乐观主义,是近代个人主义的自由主义法律制度正当性的真正基础。人在工业社会的异化摧毁了乐观理性主义。社会学的发展揭示:人与人被无可避免地连结,非物质因素、非理性因素经常分别是社会发展和人类行为中的决定性因素。嬗变中的现代民法上人像色彩包括:被连结在社会网络中受约束的人、混合了自利和激情的有限理性人、平等性丧失的“具体”人、去神圣化的人、相互协作、相互关心的人。     

Why Be Accountable? Exploring Voluntary Accountability of Australian Private Ancillary Funds

The aim of this paper is to consider why Private Ancillary Funds (PAFs), endowed philanthropic foundations with no public reporting requirements, engage in accountability in its various forms. This exploratory, qualitative study reports on perspectives on accountability from 10 semi‐structured interviews with PAF managers and/or trustees from three Australian states. Through the lens of March and Olsen's (2011) logics of action and Karsten's (2015) typology of motivational forms for voluntary accountability, findings show that although logics of appropriateness and consequentiality explain many reasons why PAFs engage in voluntary accountability, some reasons do not fit comfortably within either logic. The findings challenge conceptions embedded in much non‐profit accountability literature that motivations for and purposes of accountability are linked with sustainability and survival. By examining this subset of non‐profit organisations subject to limited regulatory accountability, a clearer understanding of motivations for voluntary accountability is achieved.     

In Extremis: a Self‐defeating Element in the ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ Strategy

The main policy reaction to the terrorist attacks of 7/7 and 21/7 of 2005 has been the development of the £6 million ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ (PVE) initiative which aims, as part of the government's broader counter‐terrorism strategy (CONTEST), to tackle support for, and the promotion of, violent Islamist ideologies within British society. One crucial component of this strategy is providing support for Muslim groups and individuals to tackle radicalisation and extremism directly at the local level. Funding and charitable status for mosques, Muslim community and youth groups and initiatives, ‘forums against extremism’, anti‐extremism ‘road shows’, and the training of imams are included as part of this strategy. This article argues that this aspect of PVE is not only ill‐advised, but potentially deeply counter‐productive. It takes issue with two reasons that inform the PVE strategy: first, that what motivates individuals to join extremist groups are the religious ideas themselves; second, that government intervention or involvement is an effective method for rendering the moderate antidote attractive. Arguably, neither of these assumptions is warranted in the face of contrary evidence. Consequently, this arm of PVE is, at best, barking up the wrong tree; at worst, fuelling extremism.     

Self-exclusion as a strategy of inclusion: the case of Shas

Among the many paradoxes of Israeli politics, there are the strategies of political inclusion used by organizations and parties representing groups that reject the universalism which Israeli democracy is heir to. This paper develops a model of ‘political inclusion Israeli-style’, illustrated by one party, Shas, which since 1984 proclaims itself the voice of the socially and culturally excluded Sephardi population of north African and Middle Eastern Jews, who represent over 40% of the Jewish population. Shas is also a movement of religious and ethnic revival which, by adopting a social strategy of self-exclusion grounded in strict religious observance, and of independence vis-à-vis established Ashkenazi ultra-Orthodox politics, has gained 11 out of 120 Knesset seats, inclusion in government, and control over a share of educational and welfare expenditure. The paper raises the issue whether such less-than-perfectly universalistic practices are not a variety of corporatism and possibly, for the parties concerned, a more effective strategy of incorporation than the classic social democratic path.     

Conquering versus democratizing the state: political Islamists and fourth wave democratization in Turkey and Tunisia

What do we learn from Turkey and Tunisia regarding the relationship between political Islamism and democratization? Variables identified by current research such as autonomy, “moderation”, and cooperation with secular actors can cut both ways depending on various political-institutional conditions and prerogatives. Particularly, the article argues that preoccupation with “conquering the state from within as opposed to democratizing it” has been a key priority and intervening variable undermining the democratizing potential of the main Turkish and Tunisian political Islamic actors – primarily the AKP and Ennahda. These actors have prioritized acceptance by and ownership of their respective nation states over other goals and strategies, such as revolutionary takeover or Islamization of the state and confrontations with state elites. This has led to a relative neglect of designing and building institutions, whether for Islamic or democratic transformation. Hence, while contributing to democratization at various stages, these actors have a predisposition to adopt and regenerate, reframe and at times augment the authoritarian properties of their states. Research should ask how secular and religious actors can agree on institutions of vertical and horizontal state accountability that would help to address the past and present sources of the interest of political Islamists in conquering rather than democratizing the state.     

论《世界人权宣言》的思想基础和权利体系

《世界人权宣言》以自由和平等为其思想基础,构建了世界各国和人民努力实现的共同标准。它所设定的权利体系不仅包括公民权利和政治权利,而且还涉及到经济、社会和文化权利,为国际社会提供了一份详尽的人权保护清单,成为国际人权法的基本法律文书。     

诉讼和解的价值与制度构建

诉讼和解是民事诉讼当事人合意解决纠纷的一种便利高效的诉讼制度。体现了现代司法理念和诉讼立法精神,反映了诉讼民主化、纠纷解决机制合理化及多元化的价值取向。对于化解社会矛盾,快速调节经济关系,增强团结,维护社会稳定,构建和谐社会,具有其它结案方式所不可替代的优越性。注重并构建完善的诉讼和解制度,应建立完善的审前准备程序,强化贯彻处分原则,确定和解的期间、条件及法律效力。     

宽严相济刑事政策时代精神解读

宽严相济政策是基于历史的承接、现实的反思和时代的发展这一动态过程，在和谐社会语境下提出的指导运用刑罚方法与犯罪作斗争的基本刑事政策。对这一政策所蕴涵的时代精神做正确解读，必须立足于其提出的现实政治根据，并据此厘清该政策与惩办与宽大相结合及“严打”政策关系的基础上，才能深刻领会其指导价值，正确把握其基本导向。对这一政策所蕴涵的时代精神的理性解读，不仅有助于在当下的司法实践中提高贯彻的自觉性和执行力，而且也有助于明确中国刑事法治今后应当努力的方向。