利益分配的国家调节——论经济法的再分配功能

国家调节是对市场缺陷和市场失灵导致的利益分配失衡现象的救济与矫正,是国家介入利益分配领域后,对市场初次分配格局中存在的缺陷的补救,是在市场分配基础上的再分配。经济法作为国家调节社会经济之法,其本质属性在于国家调节,是对利益进行的再分配。以利益分配与国家调节之间关系的探究为基础,对经济法再分配功能的内涵与意义加以分析,有利于我们更好地了解经济法的功能,并运用经济法的再分配功能为建设和谐社会服务。     

移动支付法律问题探析

因特网、移动通信和计算机等技术的结合使支付方式发生了新的革命,即移动支付的出现。移动支付因其随时、随地、方便和快捷等诸多特点给人们生活带来极大方便,也给人们提出了新的法律课题,诸如移动支付当事人的法律地位、法律责任等问题。     

冒名顶替入学的行政法规制与权利救济

冒名顶替入学行为严重侵犯了被顶替者的受教育权,应当予以必要的规制与救济。但是,受行为性质认定的影响,现有的规制手段和权利救济仍面临程序规制不足、高校审查职责不明、赔偿责任缺失以及重新入学难以实现等诸多困境。基于此,有必要对招生录取行为的性质重新予以界定。通过细致的比较可以确定,招生录取的性质应是一种附延缓条件的行政许可。因此,需按照行政许可的控权逻辑对冒名顶替入学问题予以规制和救济。在规制手段上,高校招生权力行使须坚持有限信息公开、重要事项参与等程序规则,同时明确高校在不同阶段的审查职责,从源头减少冒名顶替行为的发生。在权利救济上,应明晰不同侵权主体的赔偿责任,并通过对重新入学的分析,保障被顶替者的受教育权。     

网络广告中的法律问题

网络广告的迅速发展带来一系列相关的法律问题,应当针对这些法律问题,根据出现的新情况,完善对网络广告的法律规制,以促进网络广告的健康发展。     

论区域协调中政府合作协议的法律规制

政府合作协议是行政权的运行方式之一,它的运用和发展需要以相应的法律加以规制。政府所能缔结的合作协议内容应当符合依法行政原则要求,缔结程序要考虑到公众参与的要求和批准备案的问题。协议效力需要通过赋予协议方的自力救济权以及上级政府的监督制约来加以保障。     

论犯罪学意义上犯罪的刑事违法性

本文主要通过比较犯罪学和刑法学在看待犯罪的基本属性上的差别 ,推导出犯罪学特有的犯罪基本属性 ,即违反否定性的社会规范性。     

论行政复议的基本原则

全国人大常委会第九次会议通过的《中华人民共和国行政复议法》是我国民主与法制建设的又一重要成果,标志着我国行政复议制度的进一步完善.行政复议的基本原则是行政复议法的一个重要问题,对行政复议的基本原则问题加以研究,有助于我们加深对这部法律的理解,更好地贯彻执行这部法律.     

An overview: A new era of tax enforcement – from “big stick” to responsive regulation

Recent developments in regulation and tax administration in Australia inspired this article on tax compliance and responsive regulation. This article analyzes the economics of crime and compliance as the dominant approach to tax enforcement of the past three and a half decades. It evaluates the key advantages and disadvantages of the economic approach as well as its application to tax. The article then explores responsive regulation as an alternative method that draws on the economic paradigm but also supplements this approach with other theories, particularly those involving identity, conflict escalation, and procedural justice. Building on this analysis and a case study of Australian investors in mass marketed tax schemes, the article suggests that the broader, more balanced, and closely tailored method of regulating responsively may enable regulators to draw on the advantages of the economic model while alleviating some of its drawbacks. Responsive regulation may therefore constitute a superior method for regulating compliance.     

Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes

The legitimacy and accountability of polycentric regulatory regimes, particularly at the transnational level, has been severely criticized, and the search is on to find ways in which they can be enhanced. This paper argues that before developing even more proposals, we need to pay far greater attention to the dynamics of accountability and legitimacy relationships, and to how those in regulatory regimes respond to them. The article thus first seeks to develop a closer analysis of three key elements of legitimacy and accountability relationships which it suggests are central to these dynamics: The role of the institutional environment in the construction of legitimacy, the dialectical nature of accountability relationships, and the communicative structures through which accountability occurs and legitimacy is constructed. Second, the article explores how organizations in regulatory regimes respond, or are likely to respond, to multiple legitimacy and accountability claims, and how they themselves seek to build legitimacy in complex and dynamic situations. The arguments developed here are not normative: There is no “grand solution” proposed to the normative questions of when regulators should be considered legitimate or how to make them so. Rather, the article seeks to analyse the dynamics of legitimacy and accountability relationships as they occur in an attempt to build a more realistic foundation on which grander “how to” proposals can be built. For until we understand these dynamics, the grander, normative arguments risk being simply pipe dreams – diverting, but in the end making little difference.     

Limits to non‐state market regulation: A qualitative comparative analysis of the international sport footwear industry and the Fair Labor Association

Non‐state market regulation has become a central focus and continues to receive scholarly attention. The present paper provides an assessment of the conditions under which multinational firms join a multi‐stakeholder certification initiative. The cases of the Fair labor Association and 17 international sport footwear companies have been selected for this purpose. A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of the 17 cases is performed. The paper argues that the combination of sustained NGO pressure and public ownership of a firm is a necessary precondition for firms joining a multi‐stakeholder certification initiative. The theoretical and policy implications of this result are discussed.