全球化语境下主权和法治的关系

通过分析民族国家兴起过程中主权和法治的复杂关系,本文提出民族国家主权是导致法治被限定为一种国家治理模式的重要因素。在全球化时代,主权和法治的关系发生了一些变化,其中最重要的是法治和全球治理联系起来。本文认为,由于全球化时代主权形式发展趋向的不确定性,全球治理并不必然选择法治作为其治理模式。但是,法治却是保障全球治理成为“善治”的必要条件。     

跨国公司对国家主权影响的多重性

跨国公司对国家主权的影响不是单一的。除被普遍关注和强调的侵蚀性影响外,跨国公司对国家主权还具有增强、转化方面的影响。在国际社会的双重竞争结构中,即无政府的国家间竞争和世界市场的跨国公司间竞争,两类国际行为体间利益的分歧与重合,是跨国公司与主权关系多重性的原因所在。在当代,跨国公司对国家主权的侵蚀只能是有限的。跨国公司与国家主权关系的多重性,表明了经济全球化对民族国家影响的复杂性。     

重申人民主权:国家权力的结构改革

在建构现代国家的过程中,中华人民共和国确立了人民主权的基本原则。应当认为,目前的政体安排是中国民主革命的必然结果,也适应了中国开启现代化过程的历史要求,但它还难以坐实人民主权原则。在国家基本制度的安排上,人民代表大会制度与人民政协制度,其功能还没能得到真正发挥,无法有效落实人民主权,而执政党对于国家权力的掌控,自身高度的行政化定位,决定性地影响了国家权力的具体运行。因此,必须区隔党权与国权,进而从目前政府改革意义上所讲的还政于民逐步走向国家建构和政体选择双重意义上的还权于民,真正坐实人民主权原则。     

The Constitutional State in the Political Philosophy of Johannes Althusius

The central questions of this article are: a) Based on what arguments defended Johannes Althusius the distinction between the private and public life sphere? b) What kind of relationships exist between the state on the one hand, and private and other public associations on the other hand? c) Based on what arguments may the government restrict actions of citizens and private associations? Answering these questions leads to the conclusion that Althusius should be mentioned as one of the founding fathers of the liberal constitutional state.     

全球化视野中的国家主权

在新世纪人类面临的各种问题与挑战中 ,全球化与国家主权的冲突具有特别重要的意义。全球化对国家的经济主权、政治主权和文化主权造成了不同程度的冲击与影响 ,导致传统的国家主权理论遭受侵蚀。发展中国家在全球化浪潮中不仅应反对西方国家干涉主权的各种企图 ,而且还要摒弃传统的绝对主权观念。     

刑事法反恐若干问题探析

反恐需要国际、国内多种形式、全方位的介入,但作为最严厉的法律手段,无疑刑事法应首当其冲。对于什么是“恐怖主义”、什么是“参加恐怖组织罪”、如何完善恐怖犯罪的罪名和刑罚、如何兼顾反恐与人权的保护和主权的维护等问题,皆值得我们进行深入、全面的研究。     

走出南海诸岛主权争端的法理迷途

南海主权争端之所以越来越复杂,甚至是迷雾重重,是因为有些国家制造了解决主权争端的法理迷途。文章认为,走出南海主权争夺的法理迷途需要明确:联合国《海洋法公约》不解决主权争端;"实际占有,有效控制"原则充满战争危机;旧金山《对日和约》涉西沙群岛和南沙群岛条款是违法条款。     

The Cybercrime Convention Committee's 2017 Guidance Note on Production Orders: Unilateralist transborder access to electronic evidence promoted via soft law

This article provides a critical analysis of the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Committee's Guidance Note of Production Orders, published on 1 March 2017. The article looks at the legal controversies surrounding production orders with a cross-border element. It explains the Guidance Note's background and origins, the basic provisions in the Cybercrime Convention allowing the law enforcement authorities to order and obtain certain information and discusses the requirements that follow from the relevant provisions of the Convention. This analysis is complemented by four critical remarks on the way the Guidance Note pushes the boundaries of acceptable treaty interpretation on the necessity of the Guidance Note, its position in regard to extraterritorial enforcement jurisdiction and sovereignty, its reticence towards fundamental rights and its refusal to define or clarify the important notion of “subscriber information”. The article argues that unilateralism is not a solution. Instead of soft law plumbing, what is needed is an agreement between sovereign states checked by their constituencies.     

Civil Society and Good Governance in Bangladesh

Many of the recent ideas and concepts of ‘good governance’ and ‘civil society’ in Bangladesh have been generated by the international aid agencies and their ‘good governance’ policy agenda in the 1990s, but there are also local meanings to the terms derived from the independence struggle and the construction of a Bangladeshi state. This article aims to obtain a clearer analytical understanding of the processes and institutions of civil society in Bangladesh that can develop workable strategy to improve governance for helping the poor and moving beyond the patron–client relationships on which they have depended historically. It also focuses attention and debate on those aspects of civil society which can enhance the quality of governance and democracy by overcoming the western top-down approach; and can strengthen the role of civil society organisations to further enhance their impact on better governance for fair distribution of public goods and ensuring social justice for the poor.     

Particular Rights and Absolute Wrongs: Giorgio Agamben on Life and Politics

Over the past decade, as human rights discourses have increasingly served to legitimize state militarism, a growing number of thinkers have sought to engage critically with the human rights project and its anthropological foundations. Amongst these thinkers, Giorgio Agamben’s account of rights is possibly the most damning: human rights declarations, he argues, are biopolitical mechanisms that serve to inscribe life within the order of the nation state, and provide an earthly foundation for a sovereign power that is taking on a form redolent of the concentration camp. In this paper, I will examine Agamben’s account of human rights declarations, which he sees as central to the modern collapse of the distinction between life and politics that had typified classical politics. I will then turn to the critique of Agamben offered by Jacques Ranciere, who suggests that Agamben’s rejection of rights discourses is consequent to his adoption of Hannah Arendt’s belief that, in order to establish a realm of freedom, the political realm must be premised on the expulsion of natural life. In contrast to Ranciere, I will argue that far from sharing the position of those thinkers, like Arendt, who seek to respond to the modern erosion of the borders between politics and life by resurrecting earlier forms of separation, Agamben sees the collapse of this border as the condition of possibility of a new, non-juridical politics.