Why Do Peace Negotiations Succeed or Fail? Legal Commitment,Transparency, and Inclusion during Peace Negotiations in Colombia (2012–2016) and Turkey (2012–2015)

This article examines the ways in which the negotiation framework—i.e., the legal guarantees, information management mechanism, and degree of inclusivity in peace negotiations—shapes the likelihood of concluding a peace agreement. Codifying the peace negotiations in law, publicizing information about the content of negotiations, and including mediators and civil society actors in peace talks is likely to increase a government's short‐term costs. However, doing so alleviates the adversaries' information asymmetry and commitment problems, sets guidelines to insure the process against exogenous shocks, and increases the number of actors taking part in conflict management. Comparing the recent peace negotiations to end intrastate wars in Colombia and Turkey, this article argues that a legalized, public, and inclusive framework made a peace agreement possible in Colombia, while the lack of such a framework caused Turkey's peace talks to fail.     

Secrecy and Self-Interest: When Mediators Act Deceitfully

3rd party intervention in interstate conflict is a common strategy for mitigating conflict and obtaining a final agreement. However, not all mediations are successful, leading to the development of a rich literature on the mechanisms which decrease the probability of failure in a 3rd-party intervention. Within this literature, some studies examine how a mediator’ behavior and incentives affect the result of the mediation. Virtually all these studies assume that the mediator is virtuous such that peace is the most desired outcome of a conflict for her. However, this study challenges this assumption and contends that a mediator can gain benefit from the conflict between disputants. If this benefit is adequately large to overcome the benefits of peace, then the mediator has enough incentive not to conduct the mediation toward a peaceful outcome. We develop a signaling game model to study this issue formally and test the proposed hypothesis empirically.     

Gender,populist attitudes,and voting: explaining the gender gap in voting for populist radical right and populist radical left parties

Empirical studies have demonstrated that compared to almost all other parties, populist radical right (PRR) parties draw more votes from men than from women. However, the two dominant explanations that are generally advanced to explain this disparity – gender differences regarding socio-economic position and lower perceptions regarding the threat of immigrants – cannot fully explain the difference. The article contends that it might actually be gender differences regarding the conceptualisation of society and politics – populist attitudes – that explain the gender gap. Thus, the gap may be due, in part, to differences in socialisation. The article analyses EES 2014 data on voting for the populist radical right and the populist radical left in nine European countries. Across countries, the gender gap in voting for the PRR is indeed partly explained by populist attitudes. For populist radical left parties, the results are less clear, suggesting that populism has different meanings to voters on the left and on the right.     

浅析计算机犯罪取证与反取证

计算机犯罪取证主要围绕证据的获取和证据的分析。主要过程包括保护和勘查现场、获取物理数据、分析数据、追踪源头、提交结果等。计算机反取证就是删除或者隐藏入侵证据,使取证工作无效。反取证技术主要有数据擦除、数据隐藏等,数据擦除是最有效的反取证方法。从取证与反取证两方面分析计算机犯罪的特征,研究反取证技术的根源,可有效地保护国家信息网络安全,打击犯罪。     

侦查虚拟化初探

虚拟化是信息技术得到高度发展的产物,它在许多领域中都得到了不同程度的应用。同样,虚拟化也应当在犯罪侦查中得到应用,由于现实条件已经具备,在侦查中完全可以不同程度地实现虚拟化：可以建立虚拟现场,进行现场“复勘”并进行虚拟重建;利用各种信息平台,展开网上虚拟侦查;建立侦查智能决策支持系统（IDSS）,实现决策虚拟化。目前,侦查虚拟化仅仅停留在理念推广阶段,尚未全面展开实践。     

基于信息不对称的政策执行分析

政策执行问题一直困扰着政策制定者,在影响政策执行的众多因素中,信息不对称无疑是不可忽视的因素之一,它通常干扰着政策的顺利执行,对这种干扰的认识将有助于我们提前采取若干措施来抑制信息不对称产生的种种不利影响。     

《政府信息公开条例》的民本思想探微

中国《政府信息公开条例》以法规的形式给予政府信息公开以强制性的规定,并作出了严格的制度安排。浏览其中条款处处彰显民本行政的思想,具体体现在法为民所立、权为民所用、利为民所谋、信为民所取、责为民所负五个方面,本文从以上方面入手探索其精神实质。     

信息权利——一种权利类型分析

二十世纪 6 0年代以来 ,以蓬勃发展的信息技术为先导 ,人类开始步入信息社会。信息问题成为最具时代魅力和理论潜能的前沿领域 ,进而成为法学研究所关注的对象。信息是信息社会中极为重要的资源形式和社会的构成性元素。作为法律概念的信息是满足特定条件的符号系。信息权利是一个以信息为客体的法律权利束 ,作为一个权利类型具有解释性和制度性的双重功能优势     

试论经营者的强制性信息披露义务

消费者知情权对应的主要是经营者的强制性信息披露义务,我国现行《消法》克服市场交易信息不对称的主要方式在于确立经营者的自愿说明义务。解决问题的关键在于法律上直接赋予经营者的强制性信息披露义务,对《消法》的模糊性规定予以修正,明文规定经营者四种情形下的强制性信息披露义务。     

信息经济学视角下的商标制度

为克服信息不对称对交易的负面影响,人们采取了信息、信誉与法律三种应对机制。无论何种机制,其作用的充分发挥都有赖于法律制度的有效保障。在信息经济学语境下,商标的功能就在于标示和区分商品出处,在降低信息成本的同时,激励企业保证商品质量,但激励不等于义务,企业并不因为使用商标而承担额外的品质保证义务。而商标法则通过规定商标确权条件、制止混淆和淡化,确保市场上商标的相互区分,为信息与信誉机制的建立和运行提供法律保障。尽管如此,离开相关法律的协同作用,商标法也难以有效运行。这就决定了只有合理划分商标法与相关法律的调整对象与适用边界,才能完善我国商标法乃至整个市场法制。