论枉法裁决罪的认定(下)

《刑法修正案(六)》第20条规定的罪名,是枉法裁决罪,而非枉法仲裁罪,称为枉法仲裁罪易致误解,并极易扩大修正案确定的适用范围。基于仲裁与诉讼的诸多不同,在枉法裁决罪的认定和适用上,不能简单地参照民事、行政枉法裁判罪的标准,而应在协调与仲裁立法(含《仲裁法》、《民事诉讼法》)及国际公约内容内在逻辑一致性的基础上,从严把握枉法裁决罪的犯罪构成及定案标准。     

媒介传播中的文化差异与文化意识

传者与受者的文化差异产生传播的意义,文化意识也需要在这种差异中构建和保持。在文化质差中,传者需要保持明确的主流文化意识;在文化位差中,传者需要树立一定的精英文化意识;在文化时差中,传者则需要具备较强的大众文化意识。传受双方如果不存在任何文化差异,那么传者的文化意识也可以淡化乃至取消。     

农产品价格上涨与农民增收

2007年以来，农产品价格上涨，农民收入并未有效增加，在物价高涨的情况下，如何保障农民的收入的增加，是我们需要面对的问题，我们要从加大对农民的直补，加强农民专业合作组织建设，加强农产品市场建设等方面努力解决问题。     

两税合并对中国引进外商直接投资的影响及对策分析

改革开放以来，中国一直实行内外有别的两套企业所得税制度，实践证明，两税并存带来许多问题，必须进行改革，才能适应经济全球化和市场经济的需要。该文认为两税合并总体上不会影响外商投资，分析了两税合并带来的问题，并提出了中国应该采取的对策。     

对"农民增收"的若干政策的分析

虽然我国制定和实施了不少"农民增收"的政策,但是,农民收入的现状仍不容乐观,究其原因,一个是政策本身的不完善;另一个是人为因素的干扰.而"减免农业税费政策"则很大程度上避免了这些不利因素,对农民增收、致富有着巨大的积极意义.     

转型时期的收入分配改革对策

改革开放以来我国居民收入水平迅速提高 ,收入差距明显扩大。影响收入分配变化的原因主要有经济增长或发展 ;经济改革或体制变迁 ;经济政策变化。值得严重关注的是体制变迁中的无序因素以及原有体制中的“政策惯性”的消极影响。改善收入分配应深化改革 ,从根本上解决转型期的无序状态 ;积极发挥政府的税收和转移支付功能 ;改进宏观经济政策 ,促进结构转换 ,鼓励中收入阶层的形成和壮大 ,从而逐步构建一个两头小、中间大的收入结构     

国有企业不同职工群体的行为取向差异研究

国有企业内部各不同职工群体的行为取向具有差异性。工人工作状态的“饱满性”特征高于管理人员和技术人员 ,其原因主要是前者受制度和岗位规章的刚性约束较多 ,而后者的工作弹性化特征较为明显。管理人员工作状态的饱满性则随职务的提高而提高。在以正式方式对待不公正待遇方面 ,工人选择更多的是“找领导”或“依靠企业工会” ,管理人员和技术人员到企业之外寻求解决问题的多于工人。在以非正式方式对待不公正待遇方面 ,选择“忍耐、接受现实”的 ,在各层级人员中均占首位 ,相比之下 ,管理人员善于“找领导恳谈” ,技术人员则惯于“另谋高就”。     

The Uniform Civil Code: The Politics of the Universal in Postcolonial India

This article speaks of a debate in contemporary India: that surrounding the validity of enacting a civil code that applies uniformly to all communities and religions in the state. In certain feminist arguments, such a code is seen as possibly providing a sphere of rights to Indian women that is alternative to the rights – or wrongs – given to them by the plural religious laws, which form the basis of the civil law in India. India, however, is a heterogeneous polity, encompassing a diversity of cultures and religions, some dominant and others forming minorities. Given these differences, some critics see the feminist call for a Uniform Civil Code as an essentialist move that prioritises gender over other agendas and politics. They argue that the site of the ‚universal’ in this feminist move is a liberal site that inherently excludes marginalised Others and benefits the dominant subjects in India. In my article, I contest this critique and question whether the site of the universal and its authorial subject in postcolonial India is, in fact, an exclusionary liberal ruse of power. I draw insights from the history of the formation of the postcolonial nation-state in India to posit an experience of the state and the universal within it, which is alternative to the Western liberal model. The aim of this article is, therefore, not so much to debate the in/validity of a Uniform Civil Code, as to address certain contemporary post-structuralist critiques of the site of the universal in postcolonial India and posit a departure from them, based on perspectives drawn from history.     

Before Identity, Gender and Human Rights

This is the beginning of an exploration of before as the thesis ‘before’ (temporally) and ‘be-fore’ (spatially) difference. Before denotes the origin and the desired destination. Before (in the double sense of ‘before’ and ‚be-in-the-fore’) opens up a space of pre-difference, of origin and of forgotten memory, as well as a space of desire, objective, illusion of teleology, unity, completion. Applied to the two domains of Human Rights and Sex/Gender, the space of ‘before’ yields two slightly different vistas: in human rights, a premodern, functionally undifferentiated society which had to invent human rights as its safeguards of functional differentiation. In Sex/Gender, ‘before’ brings a self-referential construction: that of ipseity, as the form of identity beyond comparison that does not play with id but with ipsum. Ipseity is inoperable but not useless. It is inoperable because it cannot be observed from anywhere without suffering rupture. It is not useless because it offers a ground for the reconceptualisation of difference, both through awe and desire.     

中西方古代法观念的差异及其文化解析

中西方古代法观念在法的本体、法的状况、法的价值、政体形式、治国方略等方面存在着很大的差异。这些差异在很大程度上是由不同的文化选择造成的,不同的生产方式和生活方式所决定的不同文化土壤培养出了不同的法观念。