论行政证据与行政诉讼证据的相异及衔接

行政证据与行政诉讼证据既相区别又相联系 ,并且存在较多衔接关系 ,从理论和实践上都有正确识别之必要。它们的相异主要表现在 :性质、目的、范围、证明对象、调查取证的阶段等方面。二者的衔接主要表现在 :行政诉讼的一部分证据来源于行政证据 ,二者都具有证据的基本属性、种类划分基本相同。区分行政证据和行政诉讼证据 ,不仅适应了法治行政的潮流 ,而且有助于树立现代法治和正当程序观念 ,促进行政程序价值的实现     

Republican justice

I raise three objections to Philip Pettit's republican account of justice: (a) that it fails to account adequately for the role of certain values such as substantive fairness; (b) that it represents an uncomfortable hybrid of egalitarianism and sufficientarianism; and (c) that it fails Pettit’s own ‘eyeball test’. I then conclude in a more constructive vein, speculating about the kind of account of justice it is supposed to be and suggesting that, construed a certain way, it may have resources for answering the three objections.     

以审判为中心的刑事诉讼制度改革

十八届四中全会决定提出“推进以审判为中心的诉讼制度改革”,这触及了中国刑事诉讼结构中一个由来已久的症结.“以审判为中心”观念的缺失,造成了同一审级诉讼流程中审判的“离心化”和实际上的“侦查中心主义”,进而导致垂直审级结构中第一审的“失重”,在实践中引发了较为严重的后果和特殊的政治风险.推进以审判为中心的刑事诉讼制度改革,应当在两个方向上着手:在水平方向上,首先应当在宏观的侦查、审査起诉和审判的关系上实现“以审判为中心”,其中的关键在于抑制案卷移送制度的不良影响,同时为“审判中心主义”发掘更大的制度空间;其次在审判阶段应当做到“以庭审为中心”,其核心要求是保护被告方的对质权;法院判决的权威性来自公正的庭审,法院自身也不能脱离庭审来进行事实认定.在纵向的审级结构上,在打造坚实的第一审的基础上,确立第一审在事实认定方面的权威地位,同时合理界定和调整第二审和死刑复核程序的功能,确保第一审在整个刑事程序体系中居于“重心”地位.     

Relational Justice in Organizations: The Group-Value Model and Support for Change

This paper examines the psychological dynamics of the Group-Value Model for a behavioral orientation which has seldom been considered in the social justice literature: acceptance and support for change. A field study was conducted, with 176 participants members of an organization which was undergoing a change process. Participants were asked (a) to think of a specific relevant conflict situation with their supervisor; (b) to evaluate supervisor's behavior in that situation, with respect to relational and distributive justice; (c) to state the justice aspects most valued in conflict situations with their supervisor. A test of the model was conducted through a mediation analysis. According to the Group-Value Model (GVM), respect experienced within the group and pride in the group were mediating variables between justice judgements and orientation toward acceptance and support for change in the organization. Interactional and procedural aspects (relational judgements) were the only ones to predict pride, respect, and behavioral orientation, and were also the ones most valued in general conflict situations with the supervisor. The model was also tested at three different levels of analysis: organization as a whole, department, and work group. This confirmed pride and respect within the group as mediating variables between relational justice judgements and orientation toward acceptance and support for change at the department and workgroup levels.     

刑事诉讼的程序性制裁

在我国刑事诉讼实务中 ,刑讯逼供、超期羁押、侵犯被追诉方辩护权等违反程序的现象屡禁不止 ,一个重要原因在于我国缺乏严密的程序性制裁机制。制裁是法律的内在构成要素 ,是保障法律实施的必要机制 ,对于实现法的公平与正义具有极其重要的意义。程序性制裁无论是在适用范围、实施机制 ,还是在基本功能方面都是刑事制裁、民事制裁、纪律制裁和国家赔偿所无法替代的。程序性制裁有终止诉讼、撤销原判、排除非法证据、诉讼行为绝对无效、诉讼行为相对无效、从轻量刑等主要方式。完善我国程序性制裁机制需要进行全面的制度改革与程序建构     

刑事诉讼效益原则初探

任何法律制度的设计及其应用都以实现一定的法律价值作为基本点和归宿 ,刑事诉讼也不例外。刑事诉讼效益原则应是其追求的目标。从刑事诉讼效益原则的内容、阻滞因素及其实现看 ,其效益原则就是怎样平衡刑事诉讼公平与刑事诉讼效率之间的关系 ,使它们达到最佳的结合点     

福利权利是个人的还是家庭的?--从性别视角看福利供热制度改革与社会公平重建

近年来,北方福利供热一直是比较敏感的社会问题,它一方面涉及到北方居民基本生活保障,另一方面也关涉到社会福利公平分配。而以往的福利供热政策是以家庭为单位,并且常常落实到男人身上。那么,在福利供热制度改革中,如何看待这种“男女不同对待”的政策?这种政策背后所隐藏的潜规则是什么?如何实现福利制度改革和社会公平重建的双赢?本文尝试探讨和回答这些问题。     

市场经济与法治关系再探讨

市场经济就是法治经济。法治必须反映和服务于市场经济。我国市场经济有不同于西方国家市场经济的独有特征 ,要结合这些特征来思索法律规则和经济规律之间的关系 ,用法治原则来指导我国市场经济建设。     

PROFILING AND POLICE LEGITIMACY: PROCEDURAL JUSTICE,ATTRIBUTIONS OF MOTIVE,AND ACCEPTANCE OF POLICE AUTHORITY*

This paper reports the results of four studies that investigate racial profiling as an attribution about police motives. Each study explores, first, the types of police behavior that heighten or lessen the occurrence of profiling attributions and, second, the consequences of such attributions. Results support prior studies in finding that judgments about whether the police are profiling are associated with the level of public support for the police. The studies then extend the analysis of subjective profiling judgments by examining their antecedents. The findings support the procedural justice hypothesis that the fairness with which the police exercise their authority influences whether members of the public view the police as profiling.     

死刑复核程序中被告人的诉讼权利问题

死刑复核程序中被告人应当享有充分的诉讼权利,这是肯定死刑复核程序的诉讼属性、体现被告人的程序主体地位、保障死刑判决正确适用、提高死刑判决可接受性的必然要求;以国际公约的相关规定为参照,我国死刑复核程序被告人的诉讼权利处于极度匮乏状态因而亟需完善,一方面应确保被告人享有普通案件审判程序中的诉讼权利除非其自行放弃,另一方面应对被告人予以特殊的保护。具体而言应当赋予被告人关于死刑复核程序审理方式的选择权、强制辩护权、反对强迫自证其罪权、无罪推定权、免受双重危险权、申请赦免、减刑权等诉讼权利,并建立死刑延期执行制度,为被告人穷尽救济手段提供必要时间保障