审判职能、说服责任与“案结事了”

本文从司法审判的特点、说服责任的性质与和谐价值的实现等方面。探讨了它们与“案结事了”的关系。在法治社会。法院的角色是根据证据裁判原则解决社会争端。诉讼各方必须履行说服责任,才能使法院判决具有可接受性,使争端得到终局性解决。法院作为国家审判机关．不应以调解优先,而应以增强证据意识、完善证据制度来实现案结事了。在刑事诉讼中．只有强化公诉人的说服责任,达到使事实认定者确信无疑的证明标准．才能减少冤假错案,实现案结事了。在民事诉讼中,应当遵循体现和谐价值的“不能采纳用以证明过错或责任的”证据规则．才能避免“善有恶报”、“案结事坏”的恶果。     

An Interdisciplinary Case Management Protocol for Child Resistance or Refusal Dynamics†

High‐conflict parental separation cases associated with child's estrangement or contact refusal take an unusually large amount of court time and generate high emotional costs for parents and children. This paper reports on a study of a research‐based pilot project and protocol, called the Parenting Conflict Resolution (PCR), which is intended to reduce parental conflict, improve interparental communication, and support or restore the parent–child relationship. The protocol was developed at the Superior Court in Quebec City (Canada), and involves single judge case management, and lawyers' commitment to have the child's best interests as their primary consideration and to guide their clients to trust the process. The assigned judge and lawyers have the ongoing involvement of a mandated psychotherapist, taking a family systems approach with the case. The PCR also requires the parents to participate in a psycho‐educational, introspective group program to work on co‐parenting and communication skills. Ongoing communication between the professionals involved in the PCR is required to ensure cohesion and accountability. This pilot project was implemented with 10 high‐conflict families, 6 of which presented with the child's resistance or refusal to see one parent. A qualitative data study was undertaken into the experiences of all the participants. The most salient result is the resumption of parent–child contact in all six contact refusal cases. Discussion highlights key elements to successfully address these cases: (a) interdisciplinary program delivery, (b) systemic understanding of the contact problems, (c) focus on the child's best interest, (d) single judge assigned to the case, (e) lawyers' support of the parents' participation, and (f) psychotherapist reporting to the court.     

不动产最高额抵押权的变更——兼评指导案例95号

按照指导案例95号,将既有债权转入最高额抵押担保债权范围的,未经登记亦有物权效力,但不得对第三人产生不利影响。该指导案例并非将不动产最高额抵押权变更的模式改变为登记对抗要件主义,而是对概括最高额抵押权之否定立场进行缓和,以便更充分地发挥最高额抵押权的优势。特定债权的转入属于最高额抵押担保的债权范围的变更,其与债权确定期间的变更、债务人基准的变更一样,都不需要后顺位抵押权人等第三人同意,因为不会破坏这类第三人的信赖基础。债权范围的变更遵循实行合同自由原则,其效力与登记无关,只不过当事人不得将非基于正常交易关系产生的债权纳入担保范围,给第三人造成难以预料的损害。这一裁判规则不得类推适用于最高额抵押权的决算期变更、债务人基准变更,为保护不特定第三人对最高额抵押担保债权是否已确定的信赖,这些事项的变更只有在最高额抵押权确定前办理登记,才能产生物权效力。     

对行政诉讼受案范围的反思与完善

我国行政诉讼受案范围的缺陷主要表现为可受理的行政行为外延过窄以及司法审查只审查行政行为的合法性而不审查其合理性等。应借鉴外国的立法经验,扩大我国行政诉讼的受案范围,并把行政行为的合理性也纳入到司法审查之中。     

柯克的普通法思想与美国宪法

爱德华.柯克推崇限制王权和普通法至上,这种思想在博纳姆案的审判意见中得到了充分体现。柯克根植于英国普通法形成历史中的普通法思想及其在裁判中的运用,为后来的美国宪法和宪政实践提供了弥足珍贵的思想启迪。     

毒品犯罪案件中特情侦查的程序控制——以4322件案例为样本的分析

对4 322件毒品犯罪案例的统计分析发现,在特情介入方面,我国各省份的认定比例、控辩审三方的认定态度以及特情的身份来源都呈现多样性,特情参与的案件以零包贩毒为主,内心常因被动且多有引诱行为,被告人适用重刑判决较为少见.反映在实务中则表现为特情的选择条件过于宽泛、案件范围背离规范、启动缺乏证据前提、过度介入以及监控失范等...     

比较法视野下的刑事诉讼启动程序改造

刑事诉讼是国家控制犯罪的能动反应,国家为了能够有效的控制犯罪,刑事诉讼的过程就必然伴随着国家强制力的运用,而国家强制力的介入势必影响作为公民个体的私权利。这样国家就必须在为保障公众的安全而随意的启动诉讼程序与为保护公民个体的私权利尽量少启动刑事诉讼程序之间作出一个明确的选择。由于各国法律传统和诉讼文化的差异,刑事诉讼的启动在标志上、条件上和方式上有着不同的认识与区别,其具有:案件输入、保障人权、案件分流的功能。目前我国刑诉启动程序中案件的输入功能欠缺,为此,必须降低立案标准,增强案件输入功能,把侦查行为的启动作为诉讼启动的标志。     

日本浪漫主义对欧洲浪漫主义的摄取

欧洲浪漫主义文学思潮产生于18世纪末的英德两国,继而影响法国,席卷欧洲大陆,点燃了北欧、俄国、美国以及亚洲的星星浪漫之火。借助欧洲浪漫主义的火种,在大约一个世纪后日本浪漫主义悄然兴起。日本浪漫主义虽然未能像欧洲浪漫主义那样在日本文学史上留下浓重的一笔,但也在欧洲浪漫主义的催发下,荡起了一串涟漪。吉田精一曾说过"日本近代文学离开欧洲文学的影响是不能成立的。"[1]众所周知,当一个国家的文学接受外来影响的时候,不是被动的,而是有选择的。通过对代表作家的个案分析,可以进一步理清日本浪漫主义和欧洲浪漫主义的文学关系。     

我国民事限制自认的含义、类型及适用——以24篇裁判文书为视角

就最高人民法院颁布的“新民事证据规定”第7条而言,其所谓“有所限制或者附加条件”的自认是指广义的限制自认。广义的限制自认包括狭义限制自认及附条件自认两个组成部分。该两者的共性是:它们都与对方提出的主张一致且附加条件。与此同时,该两者的本质区别是:狭义限制自认的最终目的是否定对方提出的相关诉讼请求。而附条件自认则能使主审法官推导出另一涉案事实的成立。案例分析显示:我国法院对广义限制自认的解读存在着诸如误将间接否认识别为狭义限制自认等问题,值得引起规则制定者的注意。     

Bridging the gap between academia and practice: Perspectives from two large-scale and niche research projects in Canada

There is a recognized disconnect in priority and synergy between academic and practitioners in forensic science. In this work, we personally reflect on our experiences in conducting research studies that directly involve academic and practitioner stakeholders. We believe, amongst others, that this “gap” can be mitigated through regular and productive communication. We also emphasize the need to create stronger and national research strategies which identifies the current and pressing needs of enforcement officials in order to bring these needs directly to academia. As part of this, researchers should actively seek to make sure what they study will be relevant within the discipline. Our reflection is geared on direct feedback from an entomological study in large scale sampling of blowflies and workshops in bloodstain pattern analysis using a forensic blood substitute.