国家与公民的合意——论行政诉讼和解

行政法的传统学说因强调行政行为的公权性和不可处分性,强调行政诉讼不同于民事诉讼的特性,因而在行政诉讼中排斥国家与公民的合意,中国行政诉讼实定法明文规定“行政诉讼不适用调解”,但在域外,尤其是法治发达国家,行政诉讼和解则是通行的制度,行政诉讼中是存在合意的。文章辨析了“和解”与“调解”,分析了我国行政诉讼中和解的实际状况,着力论证了在我国行政诉讼中引入和解制度的可行性、必要性及必要的限制。     

我国侦查透明制度的建构

侦查是现代刑事诉讼程序一个重要构成部分。我国侦查理论与实践长期以来奉行侦查保密原则。事实上,侦查本质上是一种程序构造,理应符合程序正义的基本要求。因此,在坚持侦查保密原则不动摇的前提下,主张一定程度的侦查透明,这是程序正义的应有之义,也是现代法治国家的必然要求。侦查透明有其独立的理论依据和价值基础。要在我国实现侦查透明,必须相应地采取一些具体的措施。     

公正：构建和谐社会的伦理基石

和谐社会包括人与自然的和谐、人与社会的和谐以及人与自身的和谐。在和谐社会的诸多价值诉求中,公正是和谐社会的首要价值和伦理基石。构建和谐社会必须首先从美德公正和制度公正这两个维度着手。     

论我国反垄断执法机构的设置--对现行设计方案的质疑

反垄断执法机构的科学设置 ,事关反垄断法的命运 ,其重要性是显而易见的。发达国家和地区的反垄断法在对该机构的性质定位、职能设置、程序安排诸方面都进行了周密的设计 ,赋予该机构显要的地位和超强的权力 ,以保障其执法的有效性。我国的特殊国情决定了我国反垄断法的主要使命将是如何消除和防范行政垄断 ,其斗争将是异常惨烈的。反垄断执法机构也将经受严峻考验。反垄断法讨论稿设计的反垄断执法机构设置方案 ,存在着严重缺陷 ,据此而行 ,反垄断法实施的效果是令人疑虑的。我国反垄断执法机构的设计必须废弃作为现有行政机关下属机构的思路 ,凸现其权威性、独立性和专业性     

依职权行政不作为的认定及监控对策探析

依职权行政不作为是指行政主体及其工作人员应为而不为的行为。行政不作为行为由于隐蔽性强,往往在造成侵害之后才能引起人们的重视,加之我们国家在对该类不作为行为的监控上还有很大漏洞,因而必须对依职权行政不作为行为进行准确的认定,并且从多方面加大对它的监控。     

人性论视角下的中西方传统行政文化差异

性善论与性恶论分别是中西方历史上的主流人性思想。总的说来,性善论思想对中国传统行政文化的主导影响是消极的,性恶论思想对西方传统行政文化的主导影响则是积极的。不同的主导影响造成了中西方传统行政文化之间的深刻差异。实现我国行政文化的现代化,需要吸取我国传统行政文化的精华,借鉴西方行政文化的优秀成分,避开两者的不足并积极进行创新。     

Empathic emotions and justice in society

Empathy is defined as an affect more appropriate to another's situation than to one's own. The paper (i) summarizes different modes of empathic affect arousal; (ii) shows how empathic affect may interact with social-cognitive development, to produce four levels of empathy development; (iii) suggests that causal attributions may transform empathic affect into sympathy, guilt, and empathic anger, which are major moral affects; (iv) discusses how these affects may influence moral judgment and behavior; (v) points up empathic morality's limitations and the need to embed empathy in relevant moral principles; (vi) discusses possible links between empathy and justice principles, with special focus on Rawls; (vii) illustrates the interplay of empathy, moral judgment, and justice; and (viii) suggests that moral principles may become hot cognitions.     

Integrating societal and psychological rules of entitlement: The basic task of each social actor and fundamental problem for the social sciences

A preliminary statement of a theoretical framework integrating psychological and societal determinants of justice in human affairs is presented. It is proposed that the social structure provides the rules of entitlement and decision making that regulate the course of routine social interaction. These societally based norms are representable in people's conscious thought processes. By contrast, the psychologically generated rules of entitlement, typically contradict conventionally accepted rules of thought and discourse and thus remain unconscious. The major part of the discussion considers the motivationally important circumstances that engage the unconscious psychologically compelling determinants and how their appearance in behavior is both shaped and legitimized by the situationally prevailing normative context. The final section considers some of the more important methodological, theoretical, and social policy implications of this social psychological theory of entitlements.     

How Surrogate Impact Panels Function in the Context of Intimate Partner Violence: A Mixed-Methods Study

ABSTRACT

Intimate partner violence (IPV) continues to be an urgent social problem, despite decades of intervention and prevention efforts. Restorative justice programs (e.g., victim impact panels) may be a useful addition to intimate partner violence (IPV) intervention, but it is unclear how these panels operate and to what extent they are consistent with restorative justice models. This naturalistic study of IPV surrogate impact panels used ethnographic observation of panels (n = 18), archival analysis of audience responses to the panel (N = 287), and focus groups and interviews (k = 4) with IPV survivors, an audience member, and batterer intervention providers to investigate these gaps. Findings suggest the panels manifest interactional processes consistent with restorative justice principles. Implications, limitations, and future aims of research on these panels are discussed.     

Unclogging Courts by Targeting Litigant Incentives: The Case of the Brazilian Labour Justice Reform

Overburdened courts hinder economic and social progress, yet successful court reforms are rare. Instead of boosting judicial resources or adapting procedure, Brazil tackled persistent backlogs and delays in its labour courts by replacing the pre-existing each-pays-their-own-costs (American) rule for allocation of litigation expenses with an alternative loser-pays-all (English) rule. Using a newly assembled court-level panel dataset and difference-in-differences approach, we show that the reform alleviated the courts' demand pressures and, most importantly, increased court efficacy in both adjudication and enforcement. The Brazilian experience offers valuable policy lessons about viable court reforms for other jurisdictions.