Judging politicians: The role of political attentiveness in shaping how people evaluate the ethical behaviour of their leaders

Political theorists have developed well‐defined normative understandings of what constitutes ethical political conduct. Based on democratic theory as well as the demands of practical politics, these understandings prescribe certain types of behaviour and proscribe other types. However, it is unclear to what extent this normative framework has resonance for ordinary citizens. This article demonstrates that attention to politics tends to increase the resonance of this normative framework. The analysis identifies three norms about the holding of public office that are expected to structure citizens' ethical judgments: the avoidance of conflicts of interest; conformity with the law or institutional rules; and the maximisation of the public good. The article assesses the importance of these norms in structuring judgments by means of an experiment embedded in a population survey conducted in Great Britain. The analysis finds that informational cues pertaining to conflict‐of‐interest avoidance only condition responses among the attentive, while information pertaining to law conformity has far wider resonance. This finding has implications for approaches to political ethics focusing on normative considerations that appear to have low salience for much of the general public.     

Redesigning the Family Law System to Promote Healthy Families

Family law professionals should be proactive in seeking and implementing constructive reforms. We identify some successful cutting‐edge reforms: (1) family resource centers, where all kinds of needs can be met; (2) informal family law trials, which streamline clogged calendars and provide an empowering and efficient forum; (3) licensed legal technicians, who increase public access to legal services; and (4) unbundled family law services. Second, we outline a protocol for implementation of reform developed by the Oregon Task Force on Family Law which is effective and replicable. Thoughtful reform of dispute resolution processes will serve family health and promote peace.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Evolving family constellations, private ordering through pre‐ and postmarital agreements, an increase in self‐represented litigants, and shrinking judicial resources are changing family law dramatically.
• Thoughtful, practical process reforms are needed in order to accommodate these changes.
• Practitioners should be proactive about seeking out and implementing such reforms.
• Some reforms already finding success include family relationship resource centers, informal domestic relations trials, licensed legal technicians, and unbundled legal services.
• We outline a protocol with a proven track record of success for implementing cutting‐edge family law reform.

     

论恐怖犯罪行为的根源——文明及文化冲突论解析

美国“9.11事件”清楚地向世界表明,恐怖组织及其所从事的恐怖犯罪行为将给世界带来巨大灾难,使人类文明惨遭破坏,给人们心灵留下难以忘怀的伤痛,甚至蒙上了长久的阴影。其实,恐怖犯罪由来已久,只是以前没有引起人们的足够重视罢了。目前,以美国为首的世界反恐怖战争似乎已取得了决定性的胜利,但是,如果不从根本上分析恐怖犯罪的原因,显然难以彻底消灭恐怖组织及其恐怖犯罪活动。作者认为,恐怖组织的出现,以及恐怖犯罪行为的发生,都是不同文明和不同文化冲突的结果。在经济全球化、政治一体化趋势越来越明朗的今天,充分注重各国、各民族、各区域的独立性和独特性;尊重各国和各民族的传统;协调各种文明和文化的冲突,才是治理恐怖犯罪的根本策略。     

例以辅律 非以代律——谈《清史稿·刑法志》律例关系之说的片面性

《清史稿·刑法志》夸大了清代律与例之间的冲突 ,一味抬高了例的地位 ,认为例优于律 ,甚至“以例破律” ,“以例代律” ,而律则“多成虚文”。本文引证史料 ,对此观点提出质疑 ,论证了律为主导 ,“以例辅律”才是律例关系的主流。     

所队关系变局下的刑侦基础工作

刑侦改革后,受有关职责定位模糊、思维惯性和磨合期综合症等因素的影响,派出所与责任区刑警中队之间的关系不够协调。刑侦基础工作的推进因此受到制约。正确认识所队关系,树立“双赢”观念;建立动态、开放、共享、互补的新型刑侦基础工作关系;积极拓展基础工作的新领域,开创新局面,是解决问题的主要途径。     

明代对西域的经营及中西经济文化一体化交流

明代前期的开放与进取,确保了丝路畅通,后期由于消极保守中西交往逐渐疏远,经济文化一体化交流随之阻隔。     

发挥政府的转移支付职能缩小贫富差距

贫困是世界普遍存在的问题,缩小贫富差距是各国政府都极其重视的问题,充分发挥政府转移支付的职能,是缩小贫富差距的、有效的、基本的方式之一。转型期我国的财力还有限,在这种情况下,如何实现转移支付的效用最大化,调整政府财政支出结构,减少政府投资性支出,降低行政成本,向教育科技文化、公共卫生医疗、社保、农业等领域倾斜是唯一的选择。     

20世纪以来中国学者关于清代以前中越关系的研究

基于中越之地域与历史关系,中国学者对两国之关系虽然缺乏热情,但一直有所注意。随着近年学界对中外关系史的重视,相关研究成果也有较大的增加,然而至今尚没有总结性的文章。本文试图对过去百年来中国学者在中越关系领域的研究成果进行回顾,并找出存在的问题,希望对推进此领域的研究有所裨益。     

加入世贸组织与我国劳资关系协调的探讨

加入世贸组织后,我国的劳资关系将呈现多元化、复杂化、国际化的趋势,劳动者的权益保障显得更加迫切。而协调劳资关系的途径也将是多方面的,其中最重要的是完善和加强劳工标准立法。     

浅析寻衅滋事罪与聚众斗殴罪的区别

寻衅滋事罪与聚众斗殴罪都是1997年刑法取消1979年刑法流氓罪后规定的罪名。由于两罪具有同源于流氓罪的历史渊源，实践中两罪很容易混淆。应从侵犯的客体、犯罪主体、犯罪主观方面、客观方面对两罪加以区分。