一个自由主义法学家眼中的批判法学——对安德鲁·奥尔特曼《批判法学：一个自由主义的批评》的解读

安德鲁·奥尔特曼将批判法学的核心观念概括为对自由主义的法治理想进行挑战和批判,并将该观点化解为三个分之观点进行逐一的阐述批驳：法治能否实现中立性、法律体系有无整体性客观性结构、法有没有规范性是否能够对社会和政治权力进行约束。安德鲁·奥尔特曼对批判法学核心观点的概括、分解和批评没有触及批判法学的实质内容,批判法学和核心观点是要把道德置于政治之上,使法治受制于善与美德。奥尔特曼论述的价值在于展示给我们一个法律理论问题的脉络和框架。     

美国的程序法学派

如果把美国当代诸多的法律理论比作百花齐放，那么程序法学的理论可称为其中茁壮的一枝。同经济分析法学、批判法学等七十年代后出现的新法学流派相比，程序法学的历史要长一些，影响更大些。     

批判法学在美国的兴起

<正> 自70年代末以来,一个通称为“批判法学运动”(Critical Law Studies Movement,简称CLS)的思潮在美国法学领域中开始出现,以后不断兴起,至今仍盛行不衰。从80年代美国法学刊物的目录来看,在有关法理学、法律哲学、法学理论方面的论文主题中,批判     

西方马克思主义法学的源流、方法与价值

自奥地利马克思主义者卡尔.伦纳的《私法制度及其社会功能》在20世纪初出版以来,西方马克思主义法学不仅成果颇丰,其研究中心也经历了从欧陆到英美的转变。西方马克思主义法学在方法论和认识论方面呈现出丰富多彩的多元化状态,众多流派的学者从批判的、概念分析的、自然主义的、社会理论的、结构主义的、女权主义的视角对马克思主义法律理论做出了新的解读。探索和思考西方马克思主义法学,可以拓宽马克思主义法律理论的研究向度,促进我国马克思主义法学理论与西方马克思主义法学的沟通与交流,并对西方马克思主义法学中尊重历史的文化遗产与理论成果加以吸收和借鉴。     

论西方马克思主义法学的基本特征与现实价值

西方马克思主义是指除了经典马克思主义和列宁主义之外的马克思主义。其特征是:在形式上,它是多线索、多形态展开的理论形态;在内容上,它既批判资本主义制度,也批判传统的社会主义制度;在方法论上,它突出了其法学理论的非无产阶级的主体性倾向。从总体上看,它可以分为以下四个时期:思想准备时期(19世纪末——20世纪20年代);创立时期(20世纪20年代——30年代);发展时期(20世纪30年代——70年代);“多元化”时期(20世纪80年代至今)。它具有重要的理论意义:扩大了马克思主义法学研究的视域;丰富了马克思主义法学的理论资源;有助于坚持和发展马克思主义法学的理论宝库。     

法学研究中的认识论问题

我国法学理论正面临“现代”与“后现代”的双重压力。后现代思潮主要知识进路和思想工具就是对理性的批判和否定。传统法学理论之所以没有足够的能力回应后现代的挑战,其原因也就在于对作为认识主体的人把握作为认识对象的法律的理性能力缺乏充分的批判和论证。由于我国传统法学理论的思维范式发源于知识论思想传统的合法性,所以,后现代思潮实质上是对作为传统法学理论之基础的知识论思想传统进行挑战。因此,若要充分回应这一挑战,就必须实现法学研究范式的转化,路径之一就是将人从单纯的法律认识主体转化为法律实践主体。     

法律约束、个案正义与司法论证——对自由法学的另一种解读

19世纪末的自由法学认为,实在法是存有漏洞的,法官的任务便是进行漏洞填补.为解决法官"法律约束"与"个案正义"难题,自由法学将法官裁判区别为"主观动机"与"客观论证"结构,并将法律约束置于"客观论证"层面,通过公开论理使暗含在判决中的法官"主观动机"以客观化的方式展示出来.对此,纯粹法学通过法位阶秩序理论予以批判,然该批判误解了自由法学的理论诉求,同时也就无法洞悉司法过程的真实状态.     

批判的精神与责任

书名： A Critique of Adjudication,{fin de sié cle} 作者： Duncan Kennedy 出版： Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press 1997 评论人：臧东升,美国哈佛大学法学院,法学博士。 书评 　　肯尼迪教授对于中国研究法学理论的学者来说不算是陌生的, 80年代后半期介绍和评价美国批判法学的作品对肯尼迪教授多有所涉及,〔 1〕 90年代中期由中国人民大学朱景文教授主持的美国批判法律研究运动的研究中对肯尼迪教授有比较多的介绍。〔 2〕我国学者对他的理论魅力及在批判法学中的领袖地位给予充分肯定,并对他的理论动向有比较浓厚…     

美国法律现实主义视野下的法学教育

美国法律现实主义在法学教育领域通过批判当时主流的案例教学法而兴起,并且在法学教育实践中展开了课程设置、教材内容和师资构成方面的改革。法律现实主义者的教学改革顺应了当时剧烈变动的美国社会对于法学所提出的要求,吸收了欧陆自由法学运动、美国实用主义哲学和法律功能主义的理论精髓。它对美国乃至世界上其他国家法学教育方法的发展产生了深远的影响,促成了诊所式法学教育模式的出现。     

马克思主义法学创立过程的三部曲

以唯物史观为理论基础的马克思主义法学的诞生是法学发展史上的伟大变革.马克思主义法学是由马克思、恩格斯两人共同创立的,其创立过程经历了以下三部曲:《黑格尔法哲学批判》是马克思主义法学的发源地,《德意志意识形态》是马克思主义法学的奠基之作,《共产党宣言》是马克思主义法学成熟的标志.追根溯源,研究和厘清马克思主义法学创立的过程,对于发展马克思主义法学、马克思主义法学的中国化以及指导我国社会主义法治实践都具有重要的意义.     

Two steps forward and ten steps backwards: a retreat from shareholder value primacy,stakeholder theory,creditors and directors duties in the Commonwealth Caribbean

Directors’ duties in the Commonwealth Caribbean (CC) were shaped by English law and shareholder value primacy (SVP). Directors’ must act in the best interest of the solvent company for the benefit of its shareholders generally. No direct duty is owed to creditors at common law, save to consider their interests on insolvency. SVP prominence in the CC has yielded to the acceptance of Canadian corporate law and stakeholder theory. Through a comparative analysis of the law in the UK, Germany and Canada, this paper examines the impact of stakeholder theory on directors’ duties in Barbados and Jamaica.     

Crime clearance rates in Canadian municipalities: A test of Donald Black's theory of law

Donald Black's theory of law has been considered an important theory in the sociology of law. However, while the theory views law as a quantity variable, there has been limited empirical support from quantitative studies. This study offers a quantitative test of Black's theory using data from 579 Canadian municipalities. The results show that the quantity of law, in terms of crime clearance rates, varies positively with stratification, morphology, culture, and organization just as Black's theory has predicted. In addition, population size, population density, the property and violent crime rates, and policing resources also affect the clearance rates. These findings support the general notion that there is more law for certain groups and under certain social conditions. Also, most of the findings are consistent with Black's theory, thus supporting its viability as a sociological theory. In addition, two seemingly contradictory explanations, the resource explanation and the need/dependency explanation, are proposed to interpret the findings. These contradictory and yet complementary explanations perhaps reflect the reality of law in society.     

加拿大侵权法中的转承责任

加拿大侵权法中,转承责任不是一种独立的责任形式,但却采用严格责任归责,被告与侵权行为人之间必要关系的建立是转承责任的前提。这与英美法和法国法的规定相似,与德国法、日本法和我国台湾地区的规定不同。加拿大侵权法中关于雇主和雇员、本人和代理人等有关转承责任的规定,为我国转承责任归责原则的确立提供了有益的借鉴。     

Canada as a Semiotic Society: Harold Innis,Roberta Kevelson,and the Bias of Legal Communications

The great Canadian economist/philospher Harold Innis, Marshall McLuhan’s teacher, was also especially interested in the way preserving the common law and multiple interpretive legal perspectives were essential to the preservation of human freedom. He greatly feared the rise of administratively made law as detrimental to the lively political life of free communities. Much of his work on legal theory, in which he urges Canadians to tenaciously protect their complicated legal system, anticipates the legal semiotic of Roberta Kevelson, although they had no knowledge of each other’s work and Innis may only have known of Charles Peirce indirectly. Additional support was provided by the National Science Foundation     

Complicity in International Criminal Law and Canadian Refugee Law: A Comparison

International criminal law is normally seen as the purview ofcriminal prosecutions, either internationally or domestically.However, international criminal law is also increasingly beingapplied in refugee law. This is because the 1951 Refugee Conventioncontains an exclusion clause prohibiting asylum seekers fromobtaining refugee status if they have committed a crime againstpeace, a war crime or a crime against humanity. Thus, refugeelaw refers back to international criminal law; however, whileinternational criminal tribunals deal with persons who bearthe greatest responsibility, in actual practice persons whohave been excluded from refugee protection have been mostlyfrom the lower echelons of organizations involved in atrocities.This article, based on Canadian case law, examines the conceptsof complicity, aiding and abetting and joint criminal enterprisefrom both an international criminal law point of view and froma Canadian refugee law angle, in order to determine whetherthese notions have similar contents in the two jurisdictions.     

MARRIAGE IN CANADA—EVOLUTION OR REVOLUTION?*

On July 20, 2005, the Canadian Civil Marriage Act became law, extending equal access to civil marriage to same‐sex couples while respecting religious freedom. This article briefly traces the distinctive juridical factors that have contributed to the legislation: the constitutional comity or dialogue among Parliament, the courts and the people resulting from the constitutional entrenchment of a Charter of rights and freedoms; the growth of the substantive concept of equality in Canadian law; and the impact of the constitutional division of powers and the nature of Canadian federalism. Together, these factors contributed to a constructive debate centered on respect for diversity.     

The making of the Canadian legal profession: a hybrid heritage

The Canadian legal profession emerged from the confluence of two distinct traditions: the American and the English. The colonies of British North America followed the pre-revolutionary American model of a unified legal profession, according to which all lawyers could practise as barristers and solicitors. American and Canadian lawyers pursued a client- and market-driven, eclectic type of practice that was receptive to innovations – such as the large law firm, the contingency fee, and university legal education – that were strongly resisted in England. On the governance side, however, Canadian lawyers created an indigenous but English-inflected model whereby professional self-governance was delegated to a statutorily-created body that had the power to compel all lawyers to join if they wished to practise law. With their commitment to client-centred service and strong governance, Canadian lawyers long enjoyed a cooperative and productive relationship with provincial governments, unlike the adversarial one characteristic of the United States or the long benign neglect of the legal professions by the English state. It is argued that this historical pattern may help to explain the continuing strength of the self-governance model in Canada at a time when it is being questioned and radically reformed elsewhere in the common law world.     

THE EVOLUTION OF MODERN CANADIAN FAMILY LAW PROCEDURE

"Family law procedure" differs greatly from "civil procedure." Canadian jurisdictions and common-law jurisdictions have copied English reforms of merging law and equity. Canada unlike the United States confined legislative authority over divorce to the federal government under the British North American Act. The Canadian federal government enacted the national Divorce Act of 1968, which had a homogenizing effect on substantive family law across Canada in both custody and support matters for a number of years. There are many pressures for fragmentation of procedure specifically, dealing with the provincial courts. Modern family law procedure is much more like civil procedure. If inquisitorial methods are used or if discovery is limited using "simplified rules" for smaller cases, family law procedure will become two different tiers-one for self-represented litigants and litigants where the stakes are small and the other tier would be one that operated under the "normal" rules of civil procedure.     

Supreme Court of Canada's “Beautiful Mind” case

The Supreme Court of Canada's (SCC) first case involving capacity and the refusal of involuntary psychiatric treatment involved a self described “professor” who had been referred to as “Canada's Beautiful Mind”. He had been found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for uttering death threats. While considered incapable of making a treatment decision by psychiatrists and a review board, three levels of court, including the SCC, found him to be capable. “Professor” Starson therefore continued to refuse treatment for his psychosis and spent over seven years detained because he refused the treatment required to become well enough to be released. This refusal of treatment is permitted under Ontario law, although it is not permitted in some other Canadian provinces, and in many other countries.This article describes Starson's situation, Ontario's law with respect to consent to treatment and relevant Canadian constitutional and criminal law. It provides an analysis of the Consent and Capacity Board decision and the court appeals. Implications from Starson's case are analyzed in relation to what happened to Starson, human rights and comparative law pertaining to involuntary patients' refusal of treatment, especially their relevance to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and laws in some other countries. Many Canadian and foreign jurisdictions where laws apparently accord with human rights codes do not allow a person to refuse the treatment required to restore their liberty. We conclude that a law that allows a person with a mental illness to be incarcerated indefinitely in a “hospital” because needed psychiatric treatment cannot, by law, be provided is not justifiable in a caring democratic jurisdiction.     

Recent Supreme Court of Canada rulings on criminal defendants' right to counsel

The Supreme Court of Canada recently issued a trilogy of decisions pertaining to suspects' right to legal representation. These rulings further a major difference between the US and Canadian law: Canadian criminal suspects have far less access to legal counsel than suspects in the USA. This paper summarizes these decisions and draws comparisons between Canadian and the US criminal procedure with respect to a suspect's rights to legal representation. We present preliminary data on Canadian citizens' misunderstanding of criminal suspects' right to counsel and also Canadian legal professionals' opinions about the right to counsel. We recommend empirical investigation of the hypothesis that Canadian suspects are more likely than the US suspects to make false confessions.