Sexsomnia – a forensic psychiatric challenge – a case report

In rare penal cases, a defendant makes a claim that he or she was asleep at the time of an alleged crime. This article discusses a case of alleged sexsomnia where a man claimed that he had been asleep during a sexual encounter (rape) with a woman. The question that often arises during an investigation and in court is how complex a behaviour is someone able to perform and still be asleep? To assist the court in answering this question, forensic psychiatric experts may be appointed. But the experts were not present during the act and must therefore consider each case on the basis of the available information and existing research. This paper provides a brief overview of the research regarding sexsomnia. It will also discuss what kind of information is important to elaborate in these cases in order to clarify the premises for the experts’ conclusions to the court.     

再论刑法理念——对蔡道通教授论文观点的不同意见之商榷

刑法理念作为一种深层潜隐的价值体系,在刑法规范中占有重要的地位。要明确区分刑法理念和刑法作为一种法规范的性质之间的界限,结合知名学者的学术观点,从而进一步对刑法理念的构造和实现本土化创造坚实的理论知识条件。     

我国贿赂犯罪的立法完善

《联合国反腐败公约》在法律理念、制度机制以及贿赂犯罪的范围和构成要件等诸多方面都实现了对贿赂犯罪立法的发展与突破。文章对我国刑法关于贿赂犯罪的相关规定与该《公约》之规定进行了比较,二者有相对应之处,但在很多方面还存在较大差距。应在立法方面予以完善。     

医学会从事医疗损害鉴定之合法性研究

本文回顾了我国医疗纠纷鉴定体制发展历程,分析了医学会鉴定与司法鉴定的优缺点。在此基础上。认为在现阶段,医学会参与医疗损害鉴定具有一定的、但并不充分的法律依据,具有相对的合法性,医学会应属“准”法定鉴定部门。可以通过最高人民法院制定司法解释或卫生部制定规章的方式使其尽快“转正”。尽管如此,医学会作出的鉴定结论并不具有必然的证明力,其鉴定程序和鉴定书形式等亦应符合法律规定．而鉴定人署名并出庭接受质证是其鉴定结论被法院采信的前提条件。     

中国学者语境下《国家赔偿法》归责原则的确定

从历年《国家赔偿法》可看出,我国的国家赔偿确立的是多元的国家赔偿归责原则,就我国国情而言,应当采用过错原则、无过错原则、公平原则作为归责原则,这样才能加强政府的责任感、保障公民的权利。     

国际刑事犯罪公约翻译浅析及意义——以《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》为例

本论文着眼于国际刑事犯罪公约英译汉官方版本的翻译特色分析、评价,力图在我国法律英语翻译水平相对滞后的学术和实务氛围中,为奋战在跨国犯罪执法、司法第一线的法律工作者,尤其是国际刑侦第一线的公安干警们提供更准确更合理的法条参考文本。文章撷取《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》这一具有典型代表性的国际刑事犯罪公约的官方文本,作者在该领域进行了初步探索,并给出了理论及现实意义上的必要思考。     

结合刑法修正案（八）探析我国刑罚结构改革——以刑罚轻缓化为视角

我国刑罚结构是以死刑、自由刑为中心,属于重刑结构。刑法修正案（八）彻底贯彻了宽严相济刑事政策,重在完善刑事处罚体系,对刑罚进一步轻缓化具有极其重要的现实意义。但是,此次修法也给我国刑罚体系结构带来一些新问题,因此,还应在刑法修正案（八）的基础上,再进一步地削减死刑罪名,调整死刑与无期徒刑、有期徒刑之间的结构关系,提高罚金刑的地位和增设轻刑刑种等,对刑罚的设置进行结构性的改革。     

Criminal justice response to human trafficking in Nigeria and South Africa: suggestions for better performance

This article evaluates the response of the criminal justice system of Nigeria and South Africa in relation to human trafficking, and offer suggestions on pragmatic steps that can be taken to combat its scourge. Over the years, concerted efforts have been made to develop effective, and internationally coordinated approaches to combat the phenomenon at the national, regional and continental levels, but unfortunately, such conscientious have not yielded the desired results. Nigeria and South Africa have criminalised the menace by enacting anti-trafficking laws, but these regulations have not been able to adequately stem the tides of the crime, considering its rising profile in recent times. The reason (among others) is essentially due to the fact that these laws are selective, and not all-inclusive. Policy makers in both countries are merely formulating and adjusting strategies on an experimental basis. Though there is improvement in inter-agency cooperation within each country, but there is a wide gap in cross-national cooperation. The author draws on evolving international standards to propose six fundamentals of an effective criminal justice response to human trafficking that can be adopted by these two countries.     

Proving liability for highly and fully automated vehicle accidents in Australia

This article considers how liability questions will be resolved under current Australian laws for automated vehicle (‘AV’) accidents. In terms of the parties that are likely to be held responsible, I argue that whether the human driver remains liable depends on the degree to which the relevant AV is automated, and the degree of control the human driver had over the events leading up to the particular accident. Assuming therefore that human drivers would not be held liable for the majority of highly and fully automated vehicle accidents, plaintiffs will have to establish liability on part of those who manufacture, maintain or contribute to the operation of AVs, under the claims available in Australia's product liability regime.This article then turns to the problems of proof that plaintiffs are likely to face in establishing AV manufacturer liability in negligence, or in a defective goods claim under Part 3–5 of the Australian Consumer Law (‘ACL’). Firstly, it may be difficult to determine the cause of the AV accident, due to the technical complexity of AVs and due to ongoing concerns as to the explainability of AI-decision making. Secondly, plaintiffs may struggle to prove fault in a negligence claim, or that the vehicle was defective for the purposes of Part 3–5 of the ACL. Essentially, under both actions, manufacturers will be held to a duty to undertake reasonable testing of their AVs. Given that it is currently impracticable to completely test for, and eliminate all AV errors, and due to the broader social utility the technology is likely to offer, plaintiffs may face evidentiary challenges in proving that the manufacturer's testing was unreasonable.