社区矫正工作的检察监督方式

社区矫正工作覆盖面大,但社区矫正检察监督却存在缺乏法律保障,监督对象难确定,监督手段受限,监督方式落后,监督信息不全面等缺陷。建议完善社区矫正立法,突出监督重点,改进监督方式,建立健全监督制约机制,构建社区矫正统一信息平台,加强查办和预防职务犯罪,优化检察人员结构,加强工作机构建设。     

Uber Über regulation? Regulatory change following the emergence of new technologies in the taxi market

Can emerging technologies transform not only markets, but also foster new regulatory change mechanisms? In the context of prevailing theories of regulatory change, this article explores the extent to which an interest‐based explanation can account for the regulatory responses toward emerging Transportation Network Companies (TNCs). Based on a primary cross‐city analysis of the 40 largest cities in the United States, the study found that although the existence of ex ante interest groups indeed somewhat limited the extent of ex post regulatory acceptance of TNCs, regulators seemed to prefer the newcomers over existing incumbents and approved TNCs in 77.5 percent of the examined cities, rarely pursuing harsh enforcement even when TNCs operated illegally. The research attempts to explain this intriguing phenomenon by extending the interest‐based approach to account for the key role played by “technological regulatory entrepreneurs.” The entrepreneurs bridged collective action barriers by becoming the central agent that managed, and reaped the benefits of, the collective action, by lowering the organizational costs and by disseminating information effectively and turning consumers into political campaigners, thus successfully promoting regulatory change.     

社区矫正法律监督与社会管理创新

刑法修正案（八）中规定,对判处管制、缓刑以及假释的罪犯依法施行社区矫正,这是社区矫正首次写入我国刑事基本法律之中,是我国刑罚执行制度发展改革和社会管理创新的一件大事,标志着社区矫正法律制度的确立,这将推动我国社区矫正工作依法规范发展,也将为社区矫正法律监督与社会管理创新工作提供广阔的空间。面对新形势,社区矫正法律监督工作存在良好的发展机遇,同时也有很多问题值得我们深入研究和探讨。     

行政决策法治化：障碍及路径选择

提升政府行政决策的能力和水平,防止、避免和纠正行政决策的失误,已成为法治政府建设的必然要求。目前,我国行政决策的法治化建设还比较薄弱,行政决策的法治理念模糊、法定程序虚化、法律责任缺失、监督机制和纠错机制缺失等影响着行政决策的科学化、民主化进程。因此,树立行政法治意识,加快行政决策的立法进程,完善决策前的听证制度,建立完善的行政问责制,将行政决策纳入法治化的轨道,成为法治政府建设的重要课题。     

NO MORE CASEBOOKS: USING SIMULATION‐BASED LEARNING TO EDUCATE FUTURE FAMILY LAW PRACTITIONERS

Teaching family law using the traditional casebook method provides students with marginal knowledge and skills. To practice family law, one needs to know how to interview and counsel clients, negotiate with opposing counsel, file pleadings and supporting documents, draft agreements, and understand tax consequences. Moreover, ethical issues abound in the practice of family law, such as confidentiality, conflict of interest, and fee arrangements. Critics of traditional pedagogies in legal academia have included the MacCrate Report, the Carnegie Report, and Best Practices for Legal Education. The Family Law Education Reform Project has focused its attention on the failure of law schools to keep pace with the ever‐evolving nature and requirements of family law practice. This article offers one answer to those who seek to educate law students in a manner that will better prepare them for the practice of family law. The author, who is the director of Vermont Law School's General Practice Program, describes a family law course she has developed and taught for many years. The course is taught in an integrative fashion, and includes substantive law, practice skills, and ethical and professionalism issues. She offers the course as a response and antidote to the ongoing criticisms of tradition a methods of teaching law.     

The Professors on Public Life

Many academics misunderstand public life and the conditions under which policy is made. This article examines misconceptions in three major academic traditions—policy as science (e.g., ‘evidence‐based policy’), normative political theory, and the mini‐public school of deliberative democracy—and argues that the practical implications of each of these traditions are limited by their partial, shallow and etiolated vision of politics. Three constitutive features of public life, competition, publicity and uncertainty, compromise the potential of these traditions to affect in any fundamental way the practice of politics. Dissatisfaction with real existing democracy is not the consequence of some intellectual or moral failure uniquely characteristic of the persona publica, and attempts to reform it are misdirected to the extent that they imagine a better public life modeled on academic ideals.     

信息化侦查中的程序控制与公民信息权保障

犯罪控制与人权保障的冲突在刑侦领域尤为凸显。信息社会刑侦部门对信息资源的高度依赖决定了刑侦信息化在有效侦破案件的同时也会带来侵犯公民权利的风险。以网上立案程序实现侦查程序的控制并通过对侦查机关采集使用个人信息制度的规范,达到保障公民的信息权利乃至人权的终极目的。     

When risk‐based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges

Risk‐based regulation is becoming a familiar regulatory strategy in a wide range of areas and countries. Regulatory attention tends to focus, at least initially, on high risks but low‐risk regulatees or activities tend to form the bulk of the regulated population. This article asks why regulators need to address low risks and it outlines the potential difficulties that such risks present. It then considers how regulators tend to deal with lower risks in practice. A body of literature and survey‐based research is used to develop a taxonomy of intervention strategies that may be useful in relation to low‐risk activities, and, indeed, more widely. In an article to be published in the subsequent issue of this journal, we will then develop a strategic framework for regulators to employ when choosing intervention strategies and we will assesses whether, and how, such a framework could be used by regulatory agencies in a manner that is operable, dynamic, transparent, and justifiable.     

中国社区矫正立法模式的选择

中国社区矫正立法有"先制定上位法,后制定下位法"与"先制定下位法,后制定上位法"两种立法模式。由《社区矫正法》的法律内容的探索性决定,由当代中国社区矫正的发展逻辑决定,由社区矫正的社会属性决定,由社区矫正法的法律属性决定,社区矫正立法宜采纳"先制定下位法,后制定上位法"的立法模式,先推动地方层面上的立法、部门层面上的立法,待时机成熟,再完成国家层面上的立法。     

Index of Reviewers for 2005

Drawing upon literature from developmental criminology and place‐based policing, the Redlands, California Police Department developed the Risk‐Focused Policing at Places (RFPP) approach to preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency. The RFPP program is a community‐oriented policing and problem‐solving strategy that targets risk and protective factors related to delinquency and problem behaviors of youths living in census block group areas. We used a matched block randomized experimental design to evaluate the effects of the program on youths living in 26 census block groups in Redlands. We find that the RFPP program did not influence self‐reported delinquency, or perceptions of risk and protective factors and police legitimacy. We argue that the primary explanation for the absence of a program effect centers on the unit of analysis used for the program. The census block group is too large a geographic unit of analysis to achieve the kind of targeted and focused interventions that lead to positive crime‐prevention outcomes.