社会治理与法治

法治是社会治理的一种,社会治理是人在认识自然的规律和人的本性的基础上调整人与自然、人与人的关系,并建立和维持秩序的过程。从民主的观点来看,社会治理的最高治权应当归于人民全体。执政者所掌握的只是使用权,因此他们对社会的治理不是一种统治,而是一种管理。好的社会治理称之为善治,而法治就是一种理想的善治。     

当代西方公共管理前沿理论述评

公共管理作为一门综合性的学科,其前沿理论五花八门,但其中比较宏观和有持续影响力的当属20世纪年70代末和80年代初兴起、到现在还在继续的长达二十多年的政府改革思潮.这一思潮的主要理论基础是20世纪60年代出现的公共选择学派.新公共管理、新公共行政/服务以及治理等前沿理论都与公共选择理论有着密切的关系,是公共选择理论的发展或是在批判公共选择学派的过程中形成的理论.这几个理论相关又不尽相同,与西方思想界都有着十分深厚的渊源,反映着不同思想阵营和不同理论之间的博弈,并没有达到能够相互替代的程度.它们的风行在中国的公共管理学界也引起了层层涟漪和概念上的混淆.从西方公共管理改革实践的历史背景出发,重点就这四大理论的特点、渊源和理论效度进行综述和评论,并讨论了它们对中国公共管理发展的启示.     

论不同社会治理模式中的法治与德治

迄今为止 ,人类的社会治理主要是由统治型的社会治理和管理型的社会治理所构成的历史发展过程。近些年来 ,在向后工业社会转变的过程中 ,出现了一种新的历史趋势 ,那就是人类社会治理行为中出现了公共管理这一新的社会治理方式 ,它意味着人类的社会治理活动将又一次出现全面的变革 ,一种新型的社会治理模式即服务型的社会治理模式的出现。统治型的社会治理是以权力为基础的治理 ,可以称作为“权治” ,即权力的治理。管理型的社会治理是以权力和法律的互动为基础的 ,所以具有法治的特征。因而 ,人们倾向于把这种社会治理称作为法治 ,即法律的治理。公共管理所追求的服务型社会治理是建立在权力、法律和道德有机协调的基础上的 ,是法治和德治相统一的社会治理模式。     

中国新型政党制度的治理意蕴

新中国成立七十年来,中国新型政党制度作为产生于中国土壤的一项基本政治制度,不断发展成熟。中国新型政党制度是极具中国特色的制度设计,也是国家治理体系的重要组成部分,其中国共产党领导下的"多党合作与政治协商"特征淡化了长久以来政党制度的"管理"倾向,凸显了"治理"特性。中国新型政党制度所具有的主体多元性、过程协商性和实践合作性等治理特征,使得多党合作的治理效能得以真正发挥,彰显了中国新型政党制度的优越性。     

社会治理创新视角下农村社会组织的培育——以广州从化农村社会组织培育基地为例

健全的社会组织包括农村社会组织是社会治理过程中必不可少的重要组成部分。在社会治理创新视域下,以广州市从化农村社会组织培育基地为例,对农村社会组织培育产生的背景、优势及存在的问题进行探讨和分析,有助于完善农村社会组织和构建农村社会治理新格局。     

新冠疫情背景下中国的公共卫生外交:成就、困难与进一步推进的路径

新冠疫情治理需要国际社会加强合作,公共卫生外交是促进各国进行公共卫生合作、建立疫情全球防线的关键举措。通过开展公共卫生外交,一方面,中国争取了世界卫生组织和国际社会的支持和帮助,满足了中国抗击国内新冠疫情形势的需要;另一方面,中国凭借丰硕的抗疫成果在全球树立了典范,通过对国际社会进行疫情通报、经验沟通、技术合作和医疗援助,推动了人类卫生健康共同体理念的传播,守护了全球疫情防线。同时也应注意到,国家层面公共卫生安全战略的不完善、一些西方国家的大国博弈旧思维,以及各国公共卫生治理理念与能力的差异等问题对中国当前的公共卫生外交提出了挑战。对此,中国应尽快完善国家公共卫生安全战略,秉承人类卫生健康共同体理念,大力推进全球公共卫生外交并积极贡献卫生公共产品,以巩固新冠疫情防控的全球战线。     

Forty-five revolutions per minute: a qualitative study of Hybrid Order use in forensic psychiatric practice

Psychiatrists who recommend a Hybrid Order (Section 45A) as a disposal option at the point of sentencing accept that the convicted individual, as well as being mentally disordered and in need of treatment, is also culpable and deserving of criminal punishment. Ethical and clinical concerns have typically limited its clinical use. However, in 2015 the Court of Appeal specified in R v Vowles and others that the Hybrid Order disposal should be considered first in terms of potential mental health disposals. This judgement sets a high threshold for the use of the hospital order which has been the bedrock of inpatient forensic psychiatric practice since 1983. This study sought to explore the attitudes of consultant forensic psychiatrists towards the use of the Hybrid Order in the wake of the Vowles judgement. We interviewed 12 consultant forensic psychiatrists with longstanding experience of psychiatric sentencing recommendations. We found that the majority of consultants considered the Hybrid Order to be a valuable disposal option when used under specific circumstances. However, significant concerns were raised about its use in those with an enduring psychotic illness. Community aftercare arrangements for Hybrid Order disposals were viewed as inferior to community aftercare arrangements for Section 37/41 patients.     

Therapeutic jurisprudence and mental health tribunals: changing patterns of demand and its impact

For decades the mental health system has been ‘in crisis,’ with too little funding, too much demand and fragmented services. In England and Wales, decisions made concerning the care and treatment of those suffering from a mental disorder is governed by the Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended) (MHA 1983). Detention under the legislation is fraught with conflict; patient and clinical views are often at odds. Mental health tribunals enable patients to seek a review of their case and the legality of their detention. This paper argues that with the increased use of formal detention under the MHA 1983, the caseloads of mental health tribunals have similarly risen. Whether it is possible to advance therapeutic benefit to psychiatric patients attending tribunals is open to question. While mental health tribunals have a role to play in generating a positive psychological impact on an applicant, there is a risk that time and resource pressures may inhibit the adoption of a therapeutic approach. This paper considers the key drivers that are currently pushing detention rates up, the impact this is having on mental health tribunal caseloads and whether it is possible to bring therapeutic jurisprudence to the patient.     

The ‘Hybrid Order’: origins and usage

The hospital direction (Hybrid Order) was inserted into the Mental Health Act (MHA) in 1997 (Crime (Sentences) Act, 1997). It enables higher courts to direct hospital admission for offenders, whilst still imposing a prison sentence. The origins of the ‘Hybrid Order’ and its patterns of usage are examined. Comparisons are made with its Scottish equivalent, Section 59A of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. Both the ‘Hybrid Order’ and Section 59A have been used infrequently. This may reflect the fact that they were strongly resisted on ethical grounds at their point of inception and that they force the psychiatrist into the position of ‘punisher’, rather than ‘treater’. Since the 2007 Amendment of the MHA in England and Wales which expanded the remit of the ‘Hybrid Order’ to include all legal categories of mental disorder, not solely psychopathy, its use has unsurprisingly increased – this article delineates the considerations that need to be given in its recommendation.     

Pledges not kept: JICA's project challenges in Ghana

Japan's project aid initiatives for capacity development still occupy a large part of the aid discourse of the country's development cooperation programme. Over the years, Japan's development rhetoric has been significantly adapted to the wider policy shifts of Western donor countries and has introduced in its programme and project documents such terms as ‘ownership’, ‘needs-based approach’, and ‘participatory’ initiatives in order to achieve more ‘sustainable’ results. Furthermore, the importance of ‘institutional memory’ has been repeatedly highlighted by Japan as an important element for greater project effectiveness. This article investigates how this development rhetoric translates in Japan International Cooperation Agency's (JICA) project practice in a three-year community-based initiative in rural Ghana. The results illustrate that despite the short-term benefits the project has brought to the targeted communities, the development practice of JICA falls short of its discursive representation and more effort is needed by JICA toward a more committed and inclusive project practice.