危害与责任——论犯罪的主客观二特征

犯罪特征是反映犯罪全面属性的种概念,不能用单一特征说明犯罪本质。归纳犯罪特征应当贯彻法定性、全面性、明确性原则,并应与犯罪具体特征即犯罪构成有内在联系。犯罪特征的内容包括客观和主观两方面,客观特征是应当依法受刑罚处罚的客观危害性,主观特征是应当依法负刑事责任的主观责任性。     

侵犯商业秘密罪若干争议问题研究

侵犯商业秘密罪中的重大损失既包括直接损失,也包括间接损失。重大损失应限于物质损失,而不应包括因侵权而导致的荣誉、名誉的损失。重大损失与商业秘密的自身价值不能等同。认定侵犯商业秘密重大损失应综合考虑以权利人的损失、侵权人的获利或商业秘密的许可使用费进行计算。侵犯商业秘密罪是一种故意犯罪,其主观方面不应包括过失。侵犯商业秘密罪中的“应知”不同于刑法总则中的疏忽大意过失中对危害结果的“应当预见”,刑法分则中的“应知”是一种对犯罪对象的客观性预见,其应理解为“应可推为明知”,是一种推定故意的心理态度。     

论暴力取证罪罪名的确定及构成特征

暴力取证罪是指司法工作人员使用暴力逼取证人证言的行为。是97刑法典中的新增罪名,其罪名的确定是恰当的,此罪在客体、客观方面,主体、主观方面的特征均有争议,须予以澄清。     

论价值评价及其标准

价值评价是价值哲学的重要内容.价值评价作为一种特殊的认识活动,是评价主体将客体的属性纳入自己的头脑并运用主体的目的、需要和本质力量加以分析和改造的活动.它与一般的认知活动在对象、规则和目的上都存在着本质的差异.价值评价由于有主体的创造性、知识、情感和意志的参与,故其具有明显的主体性特征,同时,它也受着价值事实、主体需要和社会实践等客观性因素的制约.在价值评价过程中,评价的标准是合目的性和合规律性的有机结合,这两者统一的基础是实践,实践是价值评价的最高标准.     

Justice Beliefs in School: Distinguishing Ultimate and Immanent Justice

This paper combines two recent developments in just world research: the conception of belief in a just world (BJW) as a resource for coping and well-being in everyday life, and the distinction between two different facets of BJW, namely belief in immanent justice (BIJ) and belief in ultimate justice (BUJ). Moreover, these two aspects are adapted to the school context and educational psychology. Scales for measuring ultimate and immanent justice in schools were developed within a German pilot reform project with a sample of 1274 pupils. The two facets could be distinguished by means of factor analysis. The reliability of the two scales is satisfactory, and their validity is confirmed by their differential correlational patterns. Results show that not every form of BJW automatically functions as a coping resource. In fact, only BUJ is able to protect pupils' mental well-being, whereas immanent justice can actually jeopardize well-being. Similarly, BUJ is associated with the perception of solidarity and learning enjoyment in class, whereas BIJ is more closely associated with the experience of rivalry and competition in class. Finally, the socialization of the two justice beliefs is considered. The cross-sectional data provide some evidence to suggest that friendly and supportive parenting styles can promote BUJ, whereas strict parenting styles may further BIJ. More longitudinal research is needed to obtain further insights into these phenomena.     

基本权利的双重性质

在德国的宪法理论中,基本权利被认为具有“主观权利”与“客观法”的双重性质。除了作为个人权利的性质外,基本权利被认为是德国基本法所确立的“客观价值秩序”,是对国家权力产生直接约束力的法律。这一理论构成了对基本权利的宪法解释的基本框架,在此基础上,德国建构了一套严密的基本权利保障体系。这一理论对中国宪法的基本权利问题具有借鉴意义。     

罗马法中主观诚信的产生、扩张及意义

罗马法中本无主观诚信的概念,由于社会的进步,它于公元前150年在《阿梯钮斯法》中出现。主观诚信概念一旦产生,就开始了其扩张。首先扩张到了公元前67年诞生的普布利奇安诉讼中。然后在一个不能确证的时间,它扩张到了添附法。129年扩张到了继承法。在161-169年之间扩张到了家庭法。在这一过程中,主观诚信的含义摇摆于"不知"与"确信"之间,两者都是人们"走眼"、"失手"的表现。罗马法不"修理"而是救济这样的失败者,是因为他们都无害人之心,而且他们都是弱者。随着主观诚信的扩张,罗马法对它的优待措施日益丰富。     

行政行为在德国行政诉讼中的功能变迁

行政行为概念功能的变迁,同行政诉讼制度的功能定位有着密切联系。行政行为是为划定公权力边界而创造的概念,当权利保护进入无漏洞救济的时代,行政行为无力承担这一功能,从而不得不让位于主观公权利。如果对行政行为做过于宽泛的界定,可能会导致其本来肩负的程序法上的定型化功能和诉讼法上的类型化功能的衰竭甚至丧失。如果我国行政诉讼也要确立无漏洞权利保护机制,可能需要考虑加强对“合法权益”等概念的研究,以适应权利保护的完整逻辑体系。     

A Call for Help?: How Public School Principals’ Subjective Report of Institutional Weakness Relates to Disciplinary Incidents

ABSTRACT

Disciplinary incidents at U.S. public middle- and high-schools are a public policy concern. Although businesses popularly give credence to leaders’ subjective intelligence, principals’ reports of their schools’ strengths and weaknesses are questioned. To determine whether principals’ reports carry legitimacy as indicators of student offenses, the current study utilized a nationally representative survey of principals who reported on their sense of the institution and the number of disciplinary incidents in the past year (N = 1,872; replication cohort, N = 1,833). Findings showed that the more institutional shortcomings a principal endorsed, the higher total number of incidents occurred, even after controlling for institutional strength and several indicators of school crime. These findings have policy and intervention implications for improving student outcomes, and so would be of interest to funding agencies, school administrators, teachers, and parents.     

数字社会治理的权利逻辑:以个人信息权为中心

以信息技术为核心的数字社会迅速发展,促进多元主体信息交流和资讯共享,给个人信息保护带来挑战。作为数字社会公民身份的基本表征,个人信息权既是数字公民实现全面自由发展的先决条件,也是防范和控制数字权力异化的重要工具。实现数字社会个人信息权保护的价值追求,国家立法机关应秉持作为宪法价值核心的人格尊严进行立法,明晰个人信息权的规范内涵与保护机制;行政机关应遵循权力法定原则,严格基于法律保留、公共利益和比例原则处理和使用个人信息,并建立专门的个人信息权保护的监管机构;司法机关应通过法律适用和司法解释对被侵犯的个人信息权提供及时司法救济,填补法律漏洞,实现数字社会个人信息权保护的制度正义目标。