行政因素介入民事诉讼的程序性探析

民事、行政诉讼交叉案件,是在法律事实彼此相关联,在程序处理上交互影响或者互为前提的民事诉讼与行政诉讼案件。民行交叉案件种类繁多,这里主要研讨以民事争议为主、行政问题作为附带问题的案件和民事争议与行政争议并重案件的程序处理问题。尝试从赋予民事审判庭对相关行政行为一定的司法审查权的角度,借鉴日本当事人诉讼制度解决目前我国司法现状面临的诉讼瓶颈。     

浅谈入室盗窃案件的现场勘查要点

在新刑事诉讼法实施背景下,传统摸排的侦查方法将逐渐失去其存在的法制土壤。由于入室盗窃案件的因果关联少,侦查工作只能从犯罪现场做起,更突出了现场勘查的重要性。掌握入室盗窃案件的勘查技巧,提高现场勘查质量,全面获取犯罪信息,是迅速侦破入室盗窃案件的前提条件。针对入室盗窃案件的特点,对现场进出口、中心部位以及外围部位等进行重点勘查,运用各种技术手段和经验技巧进行分析和取证是此类案件侦破的有效途径。     

死刑案件被害人家属信访问题研究

在死刑案件中,被害人家属既难以通过量刑程序实现自己的复仇愿望,也难以通过刑事附带民事诉讼获得应有的赔偿,还难以通过司法救助机制获得充分的救助,这导致了被害人家属很难理性地对待刑事诉讼制度,进而采取信访甚至闹访等非常规手段来主张自己的诉求。为了兼顾死刑判决的法律效果和社会效果,一审法院不得不面临死刑政策与民意之间的直接冲突。一审法院尤其是承办法官在死刑案件一审判决前后始终面临着信访带来的压力。为了妥善处理死刑案件被害人信访问题,需要构建科学、合理的信访工作机制,并以此为契机,稳步、有序地推进涉诉信访工作机制的进一步完善。     

国际法院诉讼案件判决的执行问题探析

国际法院判决的执行问题并非只是一个执行或不执行的简单二分法问题,而是一个介于两者之间、包含一系列政治决策的复杂问题。一方面,根据《联合国宪章》和国家的实践,当事国有遵守国际法院判决的义务;另一方面,出于自身利益的考虑,当事国往往以各种理由阻止对自己不利的判决的实际生效。由于目前国际上缺乏一个有效的执行机制,这一矛盾没能得到完满的解决。因此,在分析当事国遵守国际法院判决义务的基础上,对国际法院诉讼案件判决的执行实践和执行方式进行深入探讨有重要意义。     

Optimization and validation studies of the Mentype Argus X-8 kit for paternity cases

The use of ChrX-STRs is enormous in forensic case as these have proven to be powerful tools, mainly in deficiency paternity cases when the disputed child is female, and also some special cases involving blood relatives, incest cases, fetal typing in abortion material. The Mentype^® Argus X-8 kit is a commercial multiplex system which contains Amelogenin for gender determination as well as gonosomal STR markers (DXS8378, HPRTB, DXS7423, DXS7132, DXS10134, DXS10074, DXS10101 and DXS10135). Validation studies were being performed on blood obtained from the volunteers in Turkish population. In this study, some parameters were taken under consideration for validation like DNA extraction using different protocols, quantitated by using commercially available Invitrogen Qubit Fluorometer, reaction volume validation of Master Mix and the analysis of female/male, female/female and male/male mixtures were performed. The conditions were optimized and validated using GenAmp 9700 and reducing reaction volume from 25 μl to 12.5 μl and 6.5 μl. After reducing the total volume of the reaction, the results were same and there was no effect on peak height and quality when analyzed on ABI 310 genetic analyzer. 2 paternity cases were also performed which gave the same power of discrimination as has been mentioned in Mentype^® Argus X-8 kit.     

盗窃虚拟财产研究——研究缘起、理论和现实意义及新路径

网络游戏产业已经成为互联网络经济中的一个重要组成部分,虚拟财产交易规模巨大,虚拟财产交易也被我国纳入税收征收对象范畴。盗窃网络游戏用户的虚拟财产案件频频发生,其社会危害性已达到甚至超出传统型盗窃犯罪之社会危害性,尽管我国法学理论界和实务界对于盗窃虚拟财产犯罪行为适用法律存在很多争论,但是笔者认为完全可以直接适用我国《刑法》盗窃罪予以规制。     

刑事审前法官制度的中国语境分析

刑事审前法官制度的缺位,不仅导致我国侦查程序中非法侦查行为屡禁不止,权利救济机制处于空白状态,侦查程序不具诉讼形态,也使得公诉权缺乏应有的控制,公诉方式改革未能达到预期的效果。还造成庭前程序中非法证据排除规则不能落实,证据展示程序难以运行,庭审法官的预断不能排除。加强权力制约与保障人权,必须建立司法审查制度、设立刑事审前法官．     

美国专家证言的可采性研究——以美国判例与立法的互动为中心

美国对专家证言的可采性经历了弗赖伊判例"普遍接受标准"的限定到《联邦证据规则》对专家证言"关联性"和"有用性"的立法扩张,催生了达伯特判例的"综合观察标准",又因"乔因纳"、"锦湖轮胎"判例对达伯特判例的冲击,引发了涉及科学、技术和经验知识专家证言可采性的多种判断标准的纷争,导致《联邦证据规则》作出了限缩性的修正。判例与立法的互动背后演绎着专家证言可采性的判断权由"科技社群"向"法官"移转,最终法官扮演了专家证言进入法庭"守门人"的角色。美国专家证言可采性判断标准迷失于判例促发立法的互动,为我国法官如何走出依赖原有内部设立鉴定人积习提供了有益的启迪和可借鉴的经验。     

略论大学生盗窃犯罪

昔日被视为“天之骄子”的大学生 ,有的却成了今天的盗窃犯罪嫌疑人 ,这是一件令全社会感到惋惜的事情。我们作为大学生中的一员 ,对与大学生盗窃犯罪的有关问题作一探讨。     

A Selection of Empirical Socio-Economic Research with Respect to the Functioning of Legal Rules and Institutions in Belgium and the Netherlands

In this paper some studies with respect to empirical socio-economic research which has been undertaken in Belgium and the Netherlands concerning the functioning of legal rules and institutions are discussed. The paper focuses on the domains of criminal law, civil procedure, liability and insurance. The paper argues that contrary to the overwhelming economic literature on liability and insurance, the empirical results in that domain are poor. More research is undertaken in the area of criminal law and apparently it is overwhelming in the area of civil procedure. The latter studies are, however, mainly undertaken by socio-legal scholars and less by economists. The general conclusion of the empirical studies discussed seems to be that while the empirical literature on the effect of changes in the decision making environment on rational actions in the legal system is rich and provocative, there is much less empirical testing of the effects of legal rules as such on allocational outcomes. The paper argues that much more effort should be devoted to the latter issue.