评诉讼时效司法解释中的价值趋向

2008年8月11日,《最高人民法院关于审理民事案件适用诉讼时效制度若干问题的规定》体现了督促权利人行使权利,禁止权利的滥用,以维护社会交易秩序,进而保护社会公共利益的价值趋向。此价值趋向具体表现在限定诉讼时效的适用范围,坚持诉讼时效的法定性,明确法院不得主动援引诉讼时效,放宽诉讼时效期间的起算,扩张诉讼时效障碍的适用等制度设计上。这与当前司法背景相适应,应当予以肯定。     

从实施人权公约的视角看我国行政判例对人权的保护

从1987年至2006年底,20年间各级人民法院共审结了120余万件行政诉讼案件。与之基本同时,最高人民法院通过创刊于1985年的《最高人民法院公报》,并依据2000年6月发布的《裁判文书公布管理办法》,至2006年底,总共发表了75件具有代表性的行政裁判。这些以公报案例、法公布文书和裁判文书选登等形式发表的行政裁判,已经成为人民共和国的最初行政判例。它们是被誉为重要的人权保障法的《行政诉讼法》正在得以有效实施的证明,不仅代表着中国努力建设社会主义法治国家的切实努力和中国大陆的行政审判水平与行政审判中的人权保护水平,而且展现了中国大陆正在以日益发展的司法手段,努力促进联合国人权两公约中规定的诸项人权的实施,在某些方面甚至正在拓展出新的人权保护范围和规范。同时,也面临着如何把人权保护范围,从主要限于人身权与财产权,平稳迅速地扩展到也受到人权公约保护的诸项社会权利和政治权利的问题。发展人权保障事业与建设和谐社会与和谐世界的新目标具有内在的同一性。行政判例,正在为我国实施经社文公约(CESCR),加入《公民权利和政治权利公约》(CCPR)作出积极的贡献。     

《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约》食物权法律解析

食物权作为一项基本人权关乎人类的生存、健康和尊严。《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约》第11条首次对食物权作出规定,并通过一系列评论文件阐明其内涵、国家权利和义务以及监督机制。有关食物权的规定的出台有着重要意义,但金融危机和粮食危机给食物权的实现带来了巨大的阻力。在该背景下,如何消除饥饿,提供足够的食物是国际社会共同面临的问题。     

A new Fair Trade registration scheme based on the relations of production

Fashion, accessories, and homeware fall outside the regulations of Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO), which certifies mostly food products. A handful of fashion-led Fair Trade enterprises are now providing ranges of high-quality desirable products, made by workers employed in urban enterprises as well as independent producers in cooperatives. Tabeisa, an NGO involved in Fair Trade retailing, has developed a new regulatory framework which uniquely starts by defining the relations of production between all actors in the chain. This ensures that those not previously covered by existing standards are made visible and receive fair pay and conditions.     

梭罗的个人主义理想与个人的道德良心

19世纪美国超验主义思想家H.D.梭罗的个人主义深受美国传统渊源的影响,同时也颇具个性,主要体现在他对"个人道德良心"的呼唤.他把个人良心看作比法律更高的一种道德原则.他主张:个人利益高于机构利益.任何机构化了的组织不能将自己的意志强加于人,而应当尊重每一个人的权利,使人人有机会按自己的良心行事,实现自己的生活目标.梭罗的<论公民不服从>和<瓦尔登湖>这两部作品集中表达了他的个人主义的观点,梭罗正是从个人道德良心的角度来阐释其个人主义主张的.他的个人主义理想影响了美国民族文化的建构,并已成为整个美国文化的一个重要组成部分.     

Challenging statutory limitations on children's education rights: a re-examination of the Canadian Supreme Court Decision in Auton

The 2004 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Auton concerns the right of autistic children to access services held by their parents to be essential to their children's ability to participate as members of a democratic society. It is argued that the child's right to have his or her basic developmental needs met is a constitutionally protected one. Having those developmental needs met engages both education and health rights. In Auton the parents had sought funding for the service at issue from the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Children and Families (which dealt with mental health services and other particular support programs for the families of disabled children) as well as from the Ministry of Education. The case raises central questions regarding the very nature of education and the constitutionality of a discretionary power of government to set out statutory limitations upon fundamental human rights including education rights.