法官良心与法律适用

法官在社会中扮演着重要的角色,直接适用法律,并决定着案件审理的发展方向.法官的良心即法官的正义感、责任感对于法官审理案件有决定性的指导作用,影响法官对于案件的判断,并对法官的判决作出道德的约束.随着社会的发展,社会冲突不断加剧,法律的制定与法律的适用之间有时会产生差异.基于此,在法律的框架下,有必要提出相应解决策略,使法官的良心能够为法律的正义保驾护航,成为法律最后的守护者.     

震后恢复与重建中法律关系变更问题研究

汶川地震发生后，在灾区恢复重建活动中遇到的一个很重要问题就是因为法律关系变更导致了大量的法律纠纷和社会矛盾，因此，如何在制度上建立一套规范有序的程序来解决地震灾害所破坏的各种财产关系、人际关系成为法学界和灾区所关注的重要问题。震后恢复重建活动要高度关注权力与权力关系变更、权力与权利关系变更以及权利与权利关系变更三类法律关系变更问题。由于我国目前法律法规关于法律关系变更制度的规定不系统、不规范，致使最高人民法院只有通过司法解释的方式才能解决本来应当由立法机关加以解决的震后灾区各种法律关系变更所引发的法律问题。因此，要通过制定《紧急状态法》、《灾害对策基本法》和《灾害保险法》等等法律法规的立法途径，来进一步规范和完善法律关系变更制度，为震后恢复重建工作提供更加充分和有力的法律保障。     

法官良知的价值、内涵及其养成

法官审理案件，应以事实为根据，以法律为准绳，以良知为圭臬。法官良知的内涵可以概括为“八心”，即一视同仁、平等对待之心,求真求实、勿冤良善之心,坚守正义、善解法意之心,惩恶扬善、保国安民之心,案结事了、息讼促和之心,真诚恻怛、哀矜裁判之心,勤奋敬业、救人水火之心,清廉如水、一尘不染之心。法官良知的养成，须遵循推己及人的判断善恶之法，养守戒慎的良知形成之法，反躬自省的矫正固化之法，形成文化的扩展推广之法。     

与碳排放交易有关的犯罪行为及其防范措施

碳市场属于新兴市场,呈现碎片化特征。碳排放交易标的为法律虚拟物,不需要实物交割,交易相对复杂。碳排放交易和其他金融交易一样,由于涉及资金巨大、法律不完善、监管不严密和透明度欠缺等原因,极易滋生犯罪。与碳排放交易有关的犯罪行为主要为诈骗、逃税、洗钱和网络盗窃等。应该加强各碳排放交易市场间的合作与沟通,共同监管和惩治碳排放交易所涉犯罪行为。     

Breaking the Silence: Gender Mainstreaming and the Composition of the European Court of Justice

Why has it taken so long for member states to appoint women to the Court of Justice? Despite having won relatively significant policy instruments for equal treatment at work and high levels of legislative representation, women in the European Union have been slow to extend the demand for gender mainstreaming to courts. Prior to 1999, the Court of Justice had had one woman member until Ireland appointed Fidelma Macken in late 1999, and Germany appointed Ninon Colneric and Austria appointed Christine Stix-Hackl Advocate General in 2000.The 1995 U.N. meeting in Beijing was a catalyst for the demand for balanced participation of women and men in decision-making processes within the E.U., and it coincided with Sweden, Finland and Austria joining and championing the cause of gender equality. In 1999, the Commission published a report on women in the judiciary and women lawyers began to organize across Europe. After tracing the appointment process, I review the European Parliament's role in championing women on the Court and consider recent developments. Courts, particularly supranational and federal courts, are representative institutions even if their representative function differs from legislatures. Non-merit factors have always been a factor in judicial appointments and thus the demand for women on the bench is not a terrible deviation from merit. An all male bench is no longer legitimate. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

JUDGES' UNEQUAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO EXTRALEGAL DISPARITIES IN IMPRISONMENT*

How do judges in the same court system contribute differentially to extralegal disparities in sentencing? Analyses of felony sentencing in an urban Ohio trial court uncovered two distinct but equal-sized groups of judges that differed in the magnitude of extralegal correlates to imprisonment. Within the group of judges reflecting substantive extralegal correlates to prison sentences, demographic correlates (based on defendants' race, sex, age, and the interaction between them) were more pervasive across judges relative to social demographic correlates (based on education, residence length, and means of financial support). The directions of significant relationships involving a defendant's race, age, and means of support also were inconsistent across judges. These interjudge differences suggest that analyses of cases pooled across judges at either the jurisdiction or the state level might over- or understate the relevance of particular attribution theories of sentencing disparities.     

审判人员职务犯罪的新特点与防范

审判人员的职务犯罪已严重危害着我国法治化进程,研究分析审判人员职务犯罪在新形势下的新特点,才能从根本上对审判人员职务犯罪行为的滋生和扩张加以有效控制,警示具有潜在心理的其他审判人员,健全和完善廉洁自律的法治体系。     

最高人民法院大法官的流动分析

大法官流出最高人民法院的背后,反映出来的仍然是法院体制的官僚化、法官的公务员化。从知识的角度来看,这破坏了上诉审与初审司法知识的分工,以及司法与其他部门知识的分工,不利于司法知识传统的形成;同时也强化了上级法院对下级法院的控制,以及法院与其他部门的同质化。     

Considering advances in neuroscience through the lenses of law and human?rights

Advances in neuroscience should be subject to a robust public dialogue that includes attention to the legal and human rights issues raised by both research and its applications.     

HOW JUDGES THINK ABOUT RACIAL DISPARITIES: SITUATIONAL DECISION‐MAKING IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM*

Researchers have theorized how judges’ decision‐making may result in the disproportionate presence of Blacks and Latinos in the criminal justice system. Yet, we have little evidence about how judges make sense of these disparities and what, if anything, they do to address them. By drawing on 59 interviews with state judges in a Northeastern state, we describe, and trace the implications of, judges’ understandings of racial disparities at arraignment, plea hearings, jury selection, and sentencing. Most judges in our sample attribute disparities, in part, to differential treatment by themselves and/or other criminal justice officials, whereas some judges attribute disparities only to the disparate impact of poverty and differences in offending rates. To address disparities, judges report employing two categories of strategies: noninterventionist and interventionist. Noninterventionist strategies concern only a judge's own differential treatment, whereas interventionist strategies concern other actors’ possible differential treatment, as well as the disparate impact of poverty and facially neutral laws. We reveal how the use of noninterventionist strategies by most judges unintentionally reproduces disparities. Through our examination of judges’ understandings of racial disparities throughout the court process, we enhance understandings of American racial inequality and theorize a situational approach to decision‐making in organizational contexts.