官僚制视角下的中国司法管理

将我国司法管理的现象与官僚制的特征相比较,可以发现:我国的司法管理,无论观念上、制度上或者实际运行上,都与官僚制的特征有惊人的相似;官僚制在我国司法管理体制中的发育程度相当高。本文通过对科层型司法组织和协作型司法组织两种组织结构模型及其与意识形态和诉讼程序的关系、官僚制与合议制的区别两个方面,论证了官僚制在司法管理中的不适应性。     

政法传统与司法理性--以最高法院信访制度为中心的研究

中国历来重视最高法院的信访工作,但是信访实践与形式理性化的司法技术间却存在一定的紧张关系,由于其存在具有深刻的政法传统背景,故在可预见的将来取消最高法院的信访制度是不现实的.不过伴随中国政法传统的变迁,作为政治参与形式、纠纷解决机制的最高法院信访制度,将会逐步纳入到现代司法的运行机制中去.     

Windsor and Perry: Reactions of Siblings in Same-Sex and Heterosexual Couples

The U.S. Supreme Court decisions in U.S. v. Windsor (570 U.S. 307) and Hollingsworth v. Perry (570 U.S. 399) created a focal point for public discussion of marriage equality for same-sex couples. This article reports the results of an exploratory study of the reactions of individuals currently or previously in same-sex couple relationships and a heterosexual sibling who is currently or previously married (N = 371) to the Supreme Court decisions. Thematic content analysis was used to explore participants’ responses to an open-ended question on a survey. Reactions of individuals from same-sex couples revealed the following themes: (1) longitudinal perspectives on the advancement of rights for same-sex couples; (2) emotional responses celebrating the decisions or expressing relief; (3) affirmation of their relationship or rights; (4) practical consequences of the extension of rights; and (5) minority stress related to anticipation of future prejudice or discrimination. Themes in the heterosexual siblings’ responses were (1) ally support; (2) flat support without emotion or elaboration; (3) indifference to or ignorance about the decisions; and (4) disapproval of the decisions. These themes are compared and discussed in light of prior research on reactions to marriage restriction debates and marriage (in)equality and family relationships.     

“文人画”与“院体画”言意之别

文人画”与“院体画”体现了中国绘画史中两种最为重要的绘画审美思想与艺术创作形态,对中国绘画艺术发展具有重要意义，其产生与发展过程中也各自体现出不同的时代审美内涵。“ 文人画”观在明代社会文化形态中的意义转变以及近现代绘画史研究中的涵义拓展，体现了其审美内涵的时代发展特征。“院体画”则是伴随着封建社会宫廷画院的产生出现的，有其鲜明的绘画风格特征与时代审美内涵，但是“院体画”的说法在当代已经日渐式微。     

合作型司法及其权威 ———以法院调解实践为视角

考察一下法院调解发展可以发现,它经历了式微到再次被重视的过程。法院调解提出了一种合作型司法模式。中国20世纪90年代中期以来的民事诉讼程序改革,将更多的着力点放在＂当事人主义＂上,即赋予当事人更完整的程序权利。民事司法程序的原被告双方具有对等的诉讼权利,以保证其平等的对抗性地位,与裁判者共同构成一个对抗制的三方审判模式。但法院调解的发展突破了原有的＂对抗型＂司法为唯一模式的思维框架。文章通过对基层法院的调解实践的解剖,深入分析调解这种合作型司法运行的动力、发生的方式及司法权威性构造的特点等,认为合作型司法模式反映了法治的民主性内涵,是和谐司法的文化表现。     

论人民法院庭审旁听制度

旁听庭审是落实宪法确立的公开审判原则的一项重要内容。现代司法的剧场化、法院的人为障碍、旁听庭审缺乏制度保障等因素造成了旁听率不高的现象。为此,法院应以积极的态度为公众旁听提供必要的制度保障,在立法上进一步完善旁听制度。     

美国联邦政府对州际贸易的调控

随着美国联邦政府对经济调控权力的历史演变 ,美国联邦宪法中的“州际贸易条款”历年来产生了丰富案例 ,美国建国初期的主要案例 ,体现了联邦和各州政府调控州际贸易的权限。新政前后 ,最高法院的司法哲学发生了转变 ,州际贸易条款的法院解释亦随之发生变化。由此可见 ,随着资本主义生产规模和贸易范围的扩展 ,不仅联邦调控权力本身显著扩张 ,而且联邦政府可利用贸易调控权为手段 ,去实现宪法未明确授权的目的。     

联邦最高法院与现代美国公司的成长

19世纪20年代到20世纪20年代是现代美国公司的成长、成型时期。在这一时期,美国联邦最高法院通过一系列的判决,为公司的发展作出了四个方面的贡献:实现了公司身份与法律地位的平民化、人格化;以“正当程序条款”取代“契约条款”,作为保障公司权益的新宪法依据;理顺了铁路公司与独立监管机构之间的关系;对反垄断法进行合理性解释,最大限度地发挥现代公司在美国经济发展过程中的作用。     

宪法司法化问题及其现实主义观照

旨在对“宪法司法化”这一客观现象予以现实主义的解读,以使这一颇具中国特色的问题及其讨论真正生长于我国宪政实践的土壤之中,并在事实和价值两个层面获得其应有的意义。     

Disobedient subjects – constructing the subject,the state and religion in the European Court of Human Rights

In this article, I analyse how the law participates in the (re)production process of the subject, the state and religion, and how the law's indefiniteness allows various constructions of them all. In the first part of the article I discuss the Islamic headscarf cases of the European Court of Human Rights as examples of how the discursive constructions of the state and the subject can be challenged by means of disobedience. Here the focus is particularly on Turkey and on France, where the principle of secularism is largely regarded as the basis of the republic and of the national identity. The law provides an arena where the disobedient subject and the state can challenge and re-establish the prevailing conceptualizations of the subject. In the second part of the article I address the Court's alleged Islamophobia. I explore how the constructions of the state and the subject contribute to the way religion is framed in the Court's argumentation in relation to the freedom of religion guaranteed under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The analysis shows that religion can be framed as a personal belief system, a cultural tradition, or politics which, in turn, affects the course of legal argumentation. I conclude that the Court can plausibly be accused of Christian bias, but that this conclusion is often based on insufficient analysis of the Court's case law. This article contributes to the interdisciplinary discussion on the headscarf bans from the socio-legal perspective. The aim is to explore what, besides providing legal solutions, the law does.