A Realistic Path to Implementing China’s Budget Law

The core issue for the implementation of modern budget law is to optimize the satisfaction of society’s demand for public goods. The form of implementation mechanism that will best achieve this goal has thus become a major topic in the field of legal research. To go beyond the Anglo-Saxon budget model and construct a realistic path for the implementation of China’s budget law, this issue needs to be explored from the perspective of Chinese citizens in a way that safeguards the fundamental interests of the people and is premised on upholding and improving the People’s Congress system, so as to achieve a balance between internal and external budget allocation relationships. There are three routes to implementing China’s budget law: the political, the social, and the judicial. Under the first, citizens’ political identity interests are represented by deputies who oversee the budgetary powers of administrative bodies through the People’s Congress. Under the second, citizens individually or collectively participate, influence or even decide the allocation of public economic resources through dialogue, negotiation, reasoning and argument with the responsible budgetary agency in the course of the budget’s compilation, examination and approval, execution and supervision. Under the third, the establishment of a system for budgetary litigation allows citizens to participate in and supervise the implementation of the budget law, individually or collectively. This provides judicial security for the law’s implementation. These three realistic implementation routes represent the dialectical unity of concerted institutional effort aimed directly at effective implementation of budget law. Judicial interpretations of budget law implementation indicate the importance and urgency of promoting national governance capacity through reform of the legal systems governing finance and taxation. This explains the significant role of finance and taxation law in national governance.     

论社会弱者健康权的实现

社会弱者权利保护是实现社会正义的重要组成部分，而健康权是社会弱者行使其他人权不可或缺的一项基本人权，国际人权公约对此进行了明确规定。从健康权的权利属性和给付行政下行政权行使的目的分析，政府负有促进社会弱者健康权实现的义务。在法律规定的前提下，政府应主导我国医疗保障制度的发展，并通过行政给付诉讼为社会弱者健康权的实现提供司法救济。     

基团电负性和烷基衍生物的挥发标准焓(英文)

本文使用作者自己提出的基团电负性概念,建立了一个烷基衍生物的挥发焓与基团电负性的关系 △H°_u(RX)= △H°_u(CH_3X)+(1.77n~(1/t) -1.77)X_g+3.76n-7.16式中 △H°_u是标准挥发焓 X=OH、CHO、SH、SCH_3、Cl、Br、CO_2H和I、X_g是X基团的基团电负性。     

衍生型民营企业产权制度研究

目前中国衍生型民营企业的产权制度具有路径依赖性 ,其确立思路与过程为建立法人制度 ,实现自主经营 ;建立有限责任制度 ,实现自负盈亏 ;明晰产权关系 ,实现企业机制转换。其确立难点在于国有资产的退出成本 ;国有资产的“零”置换与“负”置换 ;股份和股份设置。可按照“谁投资、谁所有 ,谁积累、谁所有”的原则界定产权 ,合理设置股权 ;统一、规范股权凭证的印制格式 ;资产评估及验资应规范化 ;建立股东名簿 ,记载股东的出资额及股权证编号、股东名称、姓名和住所 ;股权流动的规范化。     

中国法制建设的观念障碍

培育法制观念相对于整个法制工程而言是先导性和基础性的工作。西方法治思想源远流长,而中国人治思想极为丰富。当前中国官方和民间存在着法制观念的诸多障碍:官方视法律为管制民众的工具,持片面的"秩序观",对法制采取"机会主义"和"便利"态度,盛行官场"潜规则";民间"情"重于"法",迷信"关系",缺乏权利观念和争讼意识。官方和民间的观念障碍又是相互影响,互为因果的。培育法制观念既是渐进的,又是紧迫的。     

作为象征的宗族公产——以黄梅县程氏宗族为例

以往学者多将族产作为宗族的经济基础来加以考察，但在黄梅程氏的各房支争夺族产的个案中，显示了其作为界定宗族边界的标尺。明清时期，庶民宗族处于不断发展变化之中，其间赋役制度、官方的态度、地方社会的反应等等因素都在左右着这一进程，本文通过对黄梅程氏个案的细部描写，以此反映出这一过程的复杂性。     

方向导数和偏导数

通过对方向导数和偏导数两者间区别与联系的论述，揭示了它们是同属于函数变化率问题的两个平行的不同的概念．     

Approach to normality of mean and M-estimators of location

The approach to normality of an estimate is displayed graphically by the nonlinearity in the derivative of the log density, and this nonlinearity is related to the accuracy of the normal approximation for the tail area. Using techniques from small-sample asymptotics, an alternate proof of the central limit theorem is given and same indices of tail behavior are examined.     

论刑事诉讼简易程序的完善

在对我国现行刑事诉讼简易程序适用范围、被告人的诉讼权利保障等方面存在的问题进行分析的基础上,提出解决这些问题应采取的策略,以改变简易程序不简易的状况.指出我国刑事诉讼简易程序在立法上存在诸多不完善的地方,导致在司法实践中也出现了许多困惑.为实现简易程序对效率与公正的双重追求,需在比较研究的基础上对其进行改革和完善.适当扩大简易诉讼程序的适用范围,进一步加强对简易程序中被告人的权利保障.     

股东对董事直接诉讼的思考

传统法律理论认为董事只与公司之间产生法律关系,与股东之间没有直接的法律关系。《公司法》认为董事不仅应当向股东直接承担责任,而且股东还有权针对董事直接提起诉讼。该直接诉讼的基础是董事对股东的信义义务,诉讼的性质有不同学说,以特别法定责任说最有说服力。现对《公司法》的规定作出评价并指出其不足。