论中国司法改革

中国现行的司法改革措施偏离了法治方向 ,原因在于对司法改革的根本法理问题、司法改革的性质、司法的价值取向、司法独立、司法的职业化等缺乏足够的认识。本文力求理清上述问题 ,并对中国的司法改革提出了一些设想。     

International Policy Formation: The Development Of Restorative Justice Policy Within The United Nations

Restorative justice and its related terms moved from the background of ancillary sessions to the floor of the United Nations Congress. This article documents and discusses the transfer of local policy to the international arena using the UN forum and restorative justice as a case study. First, a historical timeline traces the three influential forces, (1) the United Nations forum, (2) the non-governmental organization (NGO) activities, and (3) the individual Member States’ activities, behind the restorative justice movement onto the UN agenda. An integrated modification of Blumer’s process of collective problem definition is used as a framework to analyze the policy formation. Finally, the context of how future researchers may make use of the process is analyzed by comparing the traditional research development framework to Blumer’s policy framework. A need for wide spread implementation and outcome evaluations are needed as the policy is implemented is among the key findings.     

Restorative Sentencing: Exploring the Views of the Public

Within the past decade, restorative justice has emerged as a truly global phenomenon. Although retributive justice has dominated the penal landscape, more recently, restorative principles at sentencing have attracted increased attention. Restorative sentencing emphasizes the importance of compensation and reconciliation between victims and offenders and pays less attention to establishing proportionality between the seriousness of the offense and the severity of the sentence imposed. Although voluminous (and proliferating), the scholarly literature on restorative justice has to date neglected one critical issue: public opinion with respect to this justice paradigm. Public opinion researchers too, have generally overlooked this topic. The goal of this paper is to determine which elements of the new paradigm generate public approval, and which features are likely to encounter or provoke public opposition, drawing upon related international research published in English over the past 20 years (1982–2002). The review reveals widespread support for restorative sentencing options, such as community service, compensation, and restitution, particularly when applied to young offenders. However, it also seems clear that public support for these alternatives to punitive sentencing options declines as the seriousness of the offence increases, suggesting strong public adherence to the retributive principle of proportionality in sentencing.     

刑事司法改革导向与公众诉求的冲突及其消解

目前,我国刑事司法改革的导向无疑是构建符合程序正义和人权保障要求的现代刑事司法制度。但是在这个过程中,愈演愈烈的涉法上访等现象无疑揭示了社会公众对司法制度及其裁判结果的强烈不满,从而使刑事司法的改革导向与公众诉求之间产生显在的冲突。这种现象的存在,主要原因或许是我们过于强调刑事司法在程序正义和人权保障向度上的改造,而忽略了社会公众的认同。而社会公众一旦对刑事司法改革产生感情上的疏离,仅仅依靠刑事诉讼制度的完美设计不可能获得公众的认同。因此,我们必须采取切实可行的措施使刑事司法改革获得最大程度的公众认同,缩小改革导向与公众诉求之间的距离。     

再疑“宪法司法化”——由“齐玉苓案件”引发的思考

本文通过对“齐玉苓案件”的分析对一些学者在讨论该案时所采取的“宪法司法化”的思路提出质疑,首先,宪法司法化指称的对象并不准确,宪法条文中可以“司法化”的仅仅局限在公民的基本权利部分;其次,宪法司法化是一个生造的概念,它既包含了违宪审查的味道,还有宪法诉愿的痕迹。从“齐玉苓案件”的本身性质来看,其中所涉及的真正问题是宪法中的基本权利条款是否可以对私人间侵犯基本权利的行为提供救济,以及如何提供救济。最高人民法院在“齐玉苓案件”中所采用的直接适用宪法条文的办法是不足取的,德国学者提出的基本权利间接适用的学说值得我们借鉴。     

恢复性司法述评

恢复性司法是指与特定犯罪有利害关系的各方共同参与犯罪处理的司法模式 ,具有恢复性、个人参与性、社会性、前瞻性和灵活性等特征。恢复性司法模式与传统报应性司法模式有很多不同特点 ,它把犯罪人的悔恨、忏悔和被害人的宽恕作为重要因素。恢复性司法的运作模式有社区恢复委员会、量刑小组、赔偿、社区服务、被害后果陈述、被害人犯罪人调解 ,家庭小组会议等七种类型。恢复性司法活动在司法实践中取得很好效果。     

基层司法的多元面向——以布迪厄场域理论为分析视角

乡土社会司法场域并不是国家法律的单一运作,而是多种逻辑的多元面向,乡土逻辑在司法场域中的引入是不容否定的事实.司法场域的多元面向体现为权力的博弈和利益的均衡,权力的博弈和利益的均衡是决定乡土逻辑在司法场域中引入尺度的文化变量.     

台湾地区军事司法的价值取向——以军事司法审级制度为视角

军事司法主要有两大价值,即秩序安全价值和权利保障价值。台湾地区军事司法的价值取向经历了维护军事秩序和安全的一元价值到秩序安全优先于权利保障、秩序安全和权利保障并重的二元价值的发展过程。军事司法价值取向的发展变化是台湾地区军事司法制度现代转型的内在动因,其突出表现是在军事司法审级制度方面,1956年之前实行一审一核制,1956年以后实行复判制度,1990年末改为实行上诉制度。在军事司法制度的改革和完善过程中,坚持以军人权利保障为基本价值理念,以促进当事人诉讼权利和实现司法公正为出发点和归宿。     

非犯罪化思潮及其对我国刑事政策的意义

非犯罪化是当前国际上重要的刑法思潮,在我国,对于非犯罪化刑事政策的选择有不同的意见.应当承认,非犯罪化是刑法谦抑性、经济性的要求,是理性刑事政策的选择方向.在我国当前社会转型的特殊时期,应当在适度进行立法上的犯罪化的同时,注重通过司法手段实现实质的非犯罪化.     

现代司法理念与裁判文书的改革

裁判文书与法律文化、司法理念之间存在着千丝万缕的密切关系,裁判文书可以集中反映司法理念,而司法理念对裁判文书又具有制约和能动作用.如何将现代司法理念根植于民心,是当前司法改革迫切需要解决的问题, 裁判文书的改革是弘扬和宣传现代司法理念的重要途径.