诉讼程序中的正义维度思考

法院受理的各种诉讼类型虽有着各自不同的特点,但在总的价值目标上是一致的,即要求在各自诉讼的程序上趋于合理和公正。因此,对诉讼程序的公正问题进行深入的探讨,确立合理的程序公正的价值观,不仅是诉讼法制现代化和实现司法公正的根本性问题,而且是改革现行诉讼程序操作方式,使其逐渐规范化的基本理论问题。在依法治国的前提下,厘清诉讼程序正义的内涵和外延,树立程序正义理念,不仅是人们法治意识提升的需要,也是立法和实践的需要。     

由“程序”而“正义”——论“程序正义”对“司法公正”的价值

社会主义法治国家建设要求在全社会实现公平正义,而司法是实现公平正义的最重要的途径。由于司法是一种被动性、中立性和程序性的活动,程序的正义对司法活动具有重大的意义,从某种意义上来说,正当的程序是司法的生命和灵魂。由于中国长久以来形成的“重实体、轻程序”的传统,法律适用者的程序意识淡薄,因此,在社会主义法治国家建设进程中,强调社会主义法治理念指导下的程序正义就具有重大而现实的意义。     

政治权力与正义之结构性思考

政治权力系属一项复杂且令人迷惘的概念,原因在于动机与政治行为之间的关系,是相当复杂的,因之,如何思考权力与正义理论之间的结构性问题,诚属重要。正义理论系属规范性的理论,它要对政治社会制度和个人行为的正当性与合理性,提供理论依据和衡量的标准。当代西方哲学家对正义理论的思考,往往系以分配正义为核心。探究政治权力与正义之结构问题,除了考虑分配正义之外,还应从程序正义与法律正义等面向解析。     

股东诉权的程序保障

在股东的权利意识日益凸显的今天,小股东起诉董事等公司经营者的案件已大量增多。但是,由于小股东地位弱小,加之现有法律规定失范,股东诉权的实现障碍重重。文章从程序法的角度,分析比较了国外派生诉讼制度的主要程序问题,提出我国公司法和民事诉讼法为了切实保障股东诉权所必须面临的制度革新。     

公安机关侦查权的诉讼程序控制

当今世界上,任何国家都存在警察侵犯人权的问题,而警察执法过程中在程序这一环节最易出现侵权问题。在司法实践中,公安机关行使侦查的权力时有扩张,甚至滥用,造成对犯罪嫌疑人权利的侵犯,因此,有必要进一步规范公安机关侦查权的诉讼程序控制,使侦查行为依法进行,从而加强在刑事侦查阶段的人权保障。     

Industry-Dominated Science Advisory Boards Are Perceived To Be Legitimate…But Only When They Recommend More Stringent Risk Management Policies

In 2017, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was criticized for two controversial directives that restricted the eligibility of academic scientists to serve on the agency's key science advisory boards (SABs). The EPA portrayed these directives as necessary to ensure the integrity of the SAB. Critics portrayed them as a tactic by the agency to advance a more industry-friendly deregulatory agenda. With this backdrop, this research examined board composition and its effect on the perceived legitimacy of risk management recommendations by the SAB. In an experiment, we presented participants with hypothetical EPA SABs composed of different proportions of academic and industry scientists. We then asked participants to rate their satisfaction with, and the legitimacy of, these boards in light of their decisions in scenarios based on actual EPA SAB deliberations. Participants perceived higher levels of satisfaction and legitimacy when SABs made more stringent risk management recommendations. While SABs dominated by industry scientists were perceived to be more strongly motivated to protect business interests, we found no effect of board composition on perceptions of satisfaction and legitimacy. These results are consistent with prior research on decision quality that suggests people use normative outcomes as a heuristic for assessing the quality of deliberations. Moreover, these results suggest that members of the public are supportive of federal SABs regardless of their composition, but only if they take actions that are consistent with normative expectations.     

Exploring Stigmatization and Stigma Management in Mental Health Court: Assessing Modified Labeling Theory in a New Context

Drawing on Link and colleagues' modified labeling theory, this article examines whether the stigma management strategies defendants anticipate using after mental health court exit are associated with their reported experiences during court. Using survey data from 34 mental health court graduates, we find that respondents generally perceive the mental health court as procedurally just, did not experience stigmatizing shame, and anticipate using the inclusionary coping strategy of education over the exclusionary strategies of secrecy and withdrawal. Moreover, findings reveal that the anticipated use of stigma management strategies is associated with mental health court experiences in that procedural justice is associated with inclusionary coping strategies, while stigmatizing shame is associated with exclusionary coping strategies. We conclude by encouraging researchers to further explore the role of stigmatization and shame in specialty court contexts and to continue investigating these defendant perceptions of these courts' process.     

WTO对我国税务行政诉讼制度的影响

司法审查制度是WTO法律框架中很重要的内容。我国在WTO加入议定书中向WTO其他成员承诺了司法机关(人民法院)是司法审查的主体,并实行司法最终审查原则。我国的税务行政诉讼制度与WTO的司法审查制度的要求是基本一致的,但仍存在不足和需完善之处。为了充分利用WTO提供的各项有利条件和权利,并履行"入世"承诺的各项义务,以赢得各成员国的全面信任,我国必须对税务行政诉讼制度进行改革和完善。     

第三人撤之诉中“第三人”的定 位简

我国第三人撤销之诉的适用空间极为有限。为了发挥其遏制恶意诉讼、虚假诉讼的制度功用，只能对“第三人”进行宽泛解释，将其扩张为“事实利害关系”第三人，这事实上是第三人的异化，并可能造成我国第三人撤销之诉的一系列制度困境。而化解这一困境，就必须从程序保障的基点出发，将第三人限定在受到裁判既判力扩张的第三人范围内。     

论国际商事仲裁裁决效力的正当性

现代社会,国际商事仲裁已成为除司法诉讼之外最具效用和制度化的一种纠纷解决方法。国际商事仲裁裁决效力体系的建构,应当植根于市民社会的沃土,定位于融合了私力救济与公力救济特质的社会型救济类型,循实现程序正义之途,于具体解纷过程中的合意因素与决定因素间寻求纠纷的有效解决。