中国法治建设的法文化障碍

20世纪是中国试图重建一个全新的法律秩序的世纪。自晚清“新政”改革传统法制引进西方法律制度以来 ,近百年的中国“法治”建设历程可谓艰难曲折。本文从中国与西方政治文化和法律文化的比较研究入手 ,考察和分析了中国法治建设进程中传统的政治文化、法文化与现代法治理念的内在紧张 ,进而揭示了中国重建“法治”和法律秩序的三大文化障碍 :即传统政治文化的“权力至上”传统对现代法治“法律至上”原则的排拒 ,传统“礼治”的特殊性精神与现代法律的平等性和普遍性原则的冲突 ,以及传统法文化的工具性取向与以保障人权和自由为目的的现代法治理念的冲突。作者认为 ,中国“法治”建设的成效 ,在很大程度上将取决于我们能否尽快地确立一种机制 ,使执政者以及一般民众都能养成尊重法律、自觉守法的习惯     

传统法律文化与法治现代化的对接路径

中国传统法律文化与现代法治精神对接之间存在困境,困境的形成主要由于传统法律文化具有重法制轻法治、重集体轻个人、重和合轻冲突、重德(礼)轻刑(法)等特点,并长久以来影响着人们的思想和观念,与现代法治精神相冲突。困境的消解,不能靠简单地移植西方法律,也不能仅依赖于本土资源自生,而应该通过以下几条路径:1)培植现代法律意识,去除“人治”观念,培育起真正的“法治”观念,形成民主、平等的共识;2)建构市民社会,激活契约精神;3)在立法环节上完善现代法治的同时,推进司法制度改革,加快司法现代化的进程。通过这些路径和步骤,推进法制现代化,构建中国特色的现代法治。     

新农村法治文化的社会化

中国农村法律文化表现出传统法律文化与法治文化并存的二元格局.在社会主义新农村建设中,一定要在整合传统法律文化的过程中实现法治文化的社会化.而新农村法治文化的社会化应以政府为主导力量.     

原创文化与当代法治

原创文化是指人类第一次精神自觉中产生的几种最古老、影响最深远、最富于创造性智慧的文化体系。原创文化是人类的共同财富 ,它滋养了人类 ,人类法治精神的培养和制度建设有赖于原创文化研究的深入开展。     

对抗、继承与生成:对中国法治文化根基的现代性反省

当代中国法治发展在不断走向成熟的同时,也展现出诸多问题。在文化根基上,中西方法治一直存在明显的差异。当下中国法治文化根基具有双重来源:其一是对特有传统文化精神的扬弃;其二是对现代西方法治文化精神的合理吸收。文化根基是法治发展的根本前提,中国法治建设必须处理好传统文化结构与现代法治精神的张力关系。当代中国法治文化根基的构筑在面对中西方文化对抗与自有文化继承问题的同时,还要考虑如何使传统文化在自我反思中获得新的内涵,并最终促使法治文化根基的生成。     

论当代中国六大法治主题的形成、逻辑和价值

当代中国的法治建设是伴随着民主政治诉求、市场经济转型、政府改革、执政党建设、社会建设以及文化强国的战略而一同向前推进的.在这一进程中,法治开始与民主政治、市场经济、政府、执政党、民生、文化深度结合,由此形成了民主法治、法治经济、法治政府、依法执政、民生法治、法治文化六大法治主题.六大法治主题的形成与演变体现了当代中国法治发展的历史逻辑、实践逻辑和整体性逻辑,表明当代中国重要的社会关系已被纳入法治轨道.这六大主题是当代中国法治建设的着力点.     

法治文化建设：法治城市的核心工程

法治文化奠定了法治城市的思想基础,重视法治文化培育是法治城市建设规律的必然要求。培育城市法治文化既要明确目标,又要坚持行之有效的措施。培育法治文化的关键在人。在建设城市法治文化的过程中,要充分依靠并发挥党组织和全体党员、民间组织、法律职业群体、政府及其公务人员和广大民众等主体的积极作用。     

邓小平法治思想的优秀传统文化基因

邓小平法治思想 ,作为其理论体系的—个有机组成部分 ,深深地植根于丰厚的中国优秀传统思想文化之中 ,该文从四个方面对邓小平法治思想的中国传统文化基因进行了探索。     

法治还是德治?--对中国法治进程的另一种思考

中国法治进程存在一个过渡期--法治是中国法治进程的宏观结构,德治存在于中国法治进程的微观结构之中;法治与德治结合,共同推进中国法治之进程.     

法治文化建设的意义、目标及实践路径

一、法治文化的概念及法治文化建设的意义关于法治文化和法治文化建设,学术界和法治实践中有多种解释。笔者认为,法治文化是指公民内心和行为方式中的法治意识、法治观念、法治思想及其价值追求。它是国家的法律制度、法律机构、法律设施、法律保障所体现出的文化内涵和公民在日常生活、工作中所持有并遵循的以法律价值观为核心的心理意识与行为方式。加强社会主义法治文化建设具有非常重要的意义:(一)法治文化建设是法制宣传教育深入     

International Rule of Law and Rule of Law Construction in China

The rule of law has international as well as domestic attributes, so it can be divided into two levels: the domestic rule of law and the international rule of law. Using the thinking behind the international rule of law to build the rule of law in China is both necessary and inevitable. China should put into practice the idea of the international rule of law at the institutional and the governance levels, and should at the same time participate in the UN’s rule of law activities and in international rule-making, thereby extending its rule of law discourse power and influence in the international sphere.     

Transforming the Evaluation of the Rule of Law in China*

Over the past ten years, China has seen a number of practices exploring the evaluation of the rule of law. It is important that we sum up the practical experience of these evaluations, analyze the problems they encounter, determine their direction nationwide, and put forward constructive ideas. With the issuing of the Decision of the Central Committee of the CPC on Some Major Issues Concerning Comprehensively Deepening the Reform and the Decision of the Central Committee of the CPC on Promoting a Number of Major Issues of the Rule of Law, evaluation of the rule of law faces a transformation both in theory and in practice. The key points in this transformation are having the right orientation, innovative mechanisms and solutions to tricky issues of quantitative evaluation; summing up evaluation of experience; and elevating evaluation to the level of theory. A precondition for its effective evaluation is a scientific mechanism for evaluating the rule of law; in turn, the key to a scientific evaluation is solving the problems in quantitative evaluation of the rule of law; and the necessary requirements for evaluation practice are summing up evaluation experience and elevating it to the level of theory. The key to innovative mechanisms for evaluating the rule of law lies in implementation of the third party evaluation model and in quantitative evaluation that starts with particular programs.     

Rule of Law Construction and Assessment at the Local Level

Going beyond the analytical model of the holistic state in rule of law discussion, we can classify the rule of law into national and local levels based on the stages and increments of its execution. The phenomenon of the local rule of law reflects the stages and incremental progress of building a rule of law China. It has a realistic foundation in society and a profound basis in legal theory. Comprehensively advancing the rule of law in China necessitates giving encouragement and support to construction of the rule of law at the local level. The attempts and experiments of local government enable us to explore and innovate the developmental model of the socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics. The rule of law at the local level is embodied in three dimensions: “text—action—concept.” Assessment mechanisms and indicators for the local construction of the rule of law should also be established in accordance with this framework. The building of the rule of law at the local level should be synchronized with assessment of the rule of law. We need to optimize top-level design, conduct evaluations of local legislation, improve local rule of law work performance assessment and use a rule of law index to assess the local rule of law in an overall manner.     

法治概念属性释义

当前对法治的理解仍然比较混乱,有必要澄清。法治是个政治概念而不是个法律概念,它不同于执法和司法。法治其实就是依法治国;法治是与人治相对立的政治概念;法治不等同于法制;法治以民主为前提,并保障民主,民主是法治的灵魂。     

The Rule of Law Model of Internet Governance*

The rule of law is the basic form of national governance and the rule of law model is the necessary direction for the governance of online society. Online society is in essence a new pattern of social relationships and structural forms comprising relationships among citizens, legal persons, organizational bodies, etc., formed and brought together on the basis of Internet technology; and also a reflection, expansion and expression, singly or in synthesis, of various relationships in the fields of the real economy, politics, culture, society and the environment. The rule of law model of Internet governance refers to governance theories, systems and practices that employ rule of law thinking and the rule of law model to bring the elements, structures, procedures and functions of Internet governance into the scope of the rule of law and its operational track. Reviewing the tortuous course of the development of rule of law Internet governance in China, summarizing useful experience in the construction of rule of law Internet governance, and reflecting on existing legislative, law enforcement and judicial dilemmas will enable us to build up a rule of law system of online governance with comprehensive norms, effective implementation, strict supervision and strong guarantees. This will be marked by Chinese characteristics and will ensure the application of rule of law thinking and the rule of law model in governing, operating, using and safeguarding the Internet, thus achieving sound and orderly Internet operation and development along the path of the rule of law and advancing the modernization of the Internet governance system and governance capability.     

自由的两种含义及其对法治的意义

古典自由主义时期 ,自然自由和社会自由的分类已经被明确提出。自然自由是天赋的、与生俱来的自由 ,自然自由强调自由的平等性 ;社会自由是经过理性妥协和制度限制的自由 ,社会自由强调自由的权利性。从自然自由到社会自由就是使自由由价值形态转变为权利存在 ,这个进步在人类自由史上具有里程碑意义。明确自然自由和社会自由的不同含义 ,对于法治具有重要意义 :以价值形态的自然自由为出发点 ,以权利存在的社会自由为制度核心 ,能够造就法治传统 ;宪法是自由的宣言书 ,自然自由体现为价值预设 ,社会自由表现为权利安排 ;自由既是目的 ,又是手段 ,法律制度对自由的限制应具有正当性和适宜度     

法制下法治与法治下法制

法制下法治和法治下法制是两种不同的社会存在。法制下法治之治理主体单一,法治下法制治理主体多元;法制下法治依赖国家法正义观支持,法治下法制依赖多维正义观支持;法制下法治以人为治理客体,法治下法制则以人和法律同为治理客体。在特定历史阶段,法制下法治曾经起过积极的作用;但是随着社会发展,民主勃兴和社会转型的逐步推进,法制下法治已经成为中国法制建设的瓶颈,应为法治下法制的理论和实践所突破。法治下法制是多元法律规则并存于社会与依法办事之法治原则的结晶。通过各种法规则的冲突、互动和整合,法治自然会从理想走向现实。     

法治运行的理性思考

文章以政治国家与市民社会二元化社会结构为切入点分析我国法治理论、实践应由强调法治的治国制度特性和管理、强制功能,向法治对公民个体权利的保护功能转变。通过权利主体由抽象转向具体,实现权利的物化,使法治得以实现全社会的普遍遵守。     

The Rule of Law Approach to Government Governance in China*

Chinese government governance involves the two dimensions of autonomy and co-governance. The process of moving from government management to government governance is a synchronous process of moving from government by a legal system to a “rule of law” government. Such governance coincides with the rule of law in terms of fundamental guarantees, governance frameworks, intrinsic values, external forms, goal pursuits and construction paths and lays the foundation for the realization of government governance. The multi-subject structure, multiplicity of rules and regulations, interaction of processes, diversity of modes and complexity of disputes in this form of governance place new demands on the construction of the rule of law. In response to these needs, we should improve the government’s functional orientation and the disposition of its powers by means of statute law; expand the types of administrative bodies and improve the laws on administrative organizations; enrich the sources of law; use consensus rules to improve controlling rules; be guided by interactivity in improving the administrative procedure system; normalize diversified administrative behavior; and establish multiple dispute resolution mechanisms and strengthen right relief. This will highlight the rule of law path taken by government governance. In the course of the integration and interaction of such governance with the rule of law, we will need to coordinate our responses to its latent risks, such as governance pitfalls and the limitations of the rule of law.