十八届四中全会司法改革新举措之解读

党的十八届四中全会《决定》明确了一系列司法改革新举措,对司法体制改革作出新的重大部署。最高人民法院设立巡回法庭,探索设立跨行政区划的人民法院和人民检察院,建立领导干部干预司法活动、插手具体案件处理的记录、通报和责任追究制度,从制度和体制上防范和禁止地方行政权力干涉,保障审判权、检察权依法独立行使;推进以审判为中心的诉讼制度改革,实行审判权和执行权相分离体制,探索建立检察机关提起公益诉讼制度,实行立案登记制,从司法权运行机制和职能定位上强化司法权威,促进公正司法,保障国家和公民权益。     

论民事诉讼中的违法公民代理——《民事诉讼法》第58条的漏洞与完善

由于2012年的《民事诉讼法》限制委托代理人范围的规定,导致超出该范围的委托成为"违法公民代理"。在否定委托行为法律效力时,基于委托代理制度的功能及程序安定要求等多种因素考虑,应当肯定后续诉讼行为的效力。为防止"违法公民代理"发生,应对判断委托代理人资格至关重要的"近亲属"标准予以明确化,并通过配套机制,促使相关人员配合法院完成对委托代理人资格的审查。     

The European Union in Sudan: A Missed Opportunity?

Abstract

International organisations active in Africa are often criticised for their ineffectiveness. So too is the European Union (EU), which is also accused of failing to assume a more prominent conflict management role in war-torn countries. This article examines the EU’s capacity and readiness to take on such a role in one such country, the former Republic of Sudan, home to Africa’s longest-running civil wars and the first ‘genocide’ of the 21st century. It begins by outlining the EU’s record in Darfur and the North–South Peace Process. Drawing upon 25 interviews and Hill’s ‘capabilities–expectations model’, it then questions whether the EU’s ‘capabilities’ (resources, instruments, unity) were ‘fit for purpose’ in Sudan’s hostile target setting. It concludes by identifying settings that have been more propitious for a conflict-related management function and by suggesting that the EU should better manage expectations about future security roles.     

Beyond the Thomas–Kilmann Model: Into Extreme Conflict

This article discusses an extension to the Thomas–Kilmann conflict mode instrument (Thomas and Kilmann 1977) designed specifically for conflict situations in which strong negative emotional relationships are at play. The Thomas–Kilmann (TK) model is widely used to help participants (disputants and mediators) identify how two basic conflict characteristics interact to influence how stakeholders shape their actions with regard to their interests. Essentially the TK Model is built on the premise that the two salient conflict variables are the relative importance of the relationships at hand and the substantive issues being discussed. These variables are illustrated with a simple matrix that shows how each party will interact with the other based on the relative importance it places on these variables. Graphically illustrating where the behaviors fall on the matrix can explicate parties' behaviors to add a new perspective that may change the dynamic of the conflict. But the TK Model does not address scenarios in which individuals have very negative or destructive relationships, and sabotage, blocking, and exclusion are behavioral norms. Hence, we developed the Baumoel–Trippe (BT) Extension to the TK Model to address the highly negative and often identity‐based conflicts that are often found in the world of family business. Accordingly, the BT Extension to the TK Model explores conflicts in which the relationships are not merely unimportant or uncooperative, but where they become negative to downright vengeful. There is so much at stake for family business stakeholders that the family relationships may become so adversarial that the very business and family harmony all parties value are at risk. With our extension of the TK Model, we seek to provide insight into how decisions might be made when stakeholders are in highly negative, conflictual relationships.     

行政诉讼司法建议制度的功能衍化

行政诉讼司法建议原本是一项裁判执行措施,但随着最高人民法院司法政策的变化,其发挥的事实功能被大大扩展。实践中,行政诉讼司法建议在规范性文件修改中发挥着功能性审查的作用。从社会变迁的视角观察不难发现,维稳压力、协调和解政策与地方发展型政府的模式变迁,诱发了对于行政诉讼司法建议的制度性需求,从而迫使司法建议成为行政诉讼工具箱中的重要工具。行政诉讼司法建议制度的功能衍化,为法社会学研究提供了一个极具价值的制度样本,亦为行政诉讼法的未来发展提供了背景材料。     

我国虚假诉讼受害人救济方式的类型化分析

虚假诉讼问题涉及第三人撤销之诉、执行异议之诉、再审制度等复杂问题。现有研究没有脱离微观的具体概念、制度规定,较少从更为宏观的视角进行探究。本文试图引入新的研究思路,从虚假诉讼受害人救济方式出发,用时间标准进行梳理,区分“法院是否赋予第三人参与诉讼机会”和“第三人是否实际参加诉讼”来进行类型化研究,探究我国民事诉讼法中对于虚假诉讼受害人的救济缺陷,寻求完善策略。     

现代诉讼的本质:全面理性的规范沟通

纠纷的成因是交往失败,而诉讼是重新交往解决纠纷的一种方式。将诉讼置于交往视野下,诉讼的沟通性便得以显现。无论是民事、行政还是刑事诉讼,均渗透着立足言语、实现主体间沟通的理念。诉讼通过外在规范特性保证主体间的沟通顺利进行,没有建制化程序的外在保障,沟通难以成效。诉讼的内在规范性是对诉讼规范性内涵的丰富,是一种内在的交往预设程序。经过对规范价值的内在化,诉讼交往主体形成自我约束,对诉讼规则、交往预设自愿主动承受,促进共识的实现和纠纷的解决。可以说,现代诉讼克服了传统职权主义模式或者当事人主义模式的片面理性,追求客观世界、主观世界和规范世界相融通的全面理性,保障司法公正、令人信服司法,达到司法真正权威。因此,诉讼区别于其他纠纷解决机制的最大不同,在于诉讼的本质是全面理性的规范沟通。     

公安机关对轻微刑事案件的处理机制探析

轻微刑事案件由于其所特有的社会危害性较小、可调解及和解性,在侦查阶段便可通过协商机制予以解决,不必进入公诉司法程序,而在已经进入公诉程序的案件中亦可以通过恢复性处理机制对案件嫌疑人进行惩改。公安机关在侦查阶段对轻微刑事案件进行调解具有现实必要性及价值,同时也存在相关问题,需要完善侦查阶段调解的路径,形成处理此类案件的常态化机制。     

翦论推动我国法治建设的策略

依法治国是我国的基本治国方略和为之奋斗的目标。要实现依法治国,必须加强公民宪法意识培养,发展社会主义和谐社会;健全宪法机制,制约行政权力;用宪法理顺党政关系;建立宪法诉讼制度;进一步健全我国宪法监督的程序,树立宪法权威。     

论量刑庭审程序的中国模式

量刑规范化改革要求改变原来那种"重定罪、轻量刑"的庭审程序,通过构建相对独立的量刑调查辩论程序,完善和强化公诉权及被害人求刑权,拓展和加强辩护权,实现量刑程序的诉讼化,使量刑程序与定罪程序相对分离,以达到规范和制约刑事审判自由裁量权之目的。