Obligation-based Theory vs.Right-based Theory:Confrontation of Ideas Between Warrender and Strauss

There is a transition from the objective laws or moral orders that precede human will in classical natural law to the subjective demands or rights emanating from human will in modern natural law,and it represents a historical debate on the shift from an obligation-based theory to a right-based theory.Strauss,within the context of this transition across time,assesses Thomas Hobbes's philosophy of law and recognizes him as the founder of modern natural rights theory.Using Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld's analysis of jurisprudence,Howard Warrender assesses the privilege nature of Hobbes's concept of natural rights and concludes that,since Hohfeld's privilege is the opposite of obligation and related to no-right,obligations cannot be derived from natural rights.Therefore,Warrender argues that Strauss's assertion requires correction.However,Warrender places excessive emphasis on Hohfeld's static separation of the concept of privilege within his theoretical system,overlooking the dynamic transformation from privilege to claim rights.In this regard,Hobbesian scholar Carlan's criticism of Warrender is valid.Meanwhile,Warrender's research holds theoretical significance in that he,under the premise of being a part of Hobbes'natural law tradition,transforms Hohfeld's flat,two-party legal rights relationships into a three-party legal rights structure,which could represent a potential innovation in the 20^(th)century legal philosophy.

Digital Development Rights in Developing Countries:Where the Governance Rules for Cross-Border Data Flows

The digital development rights in developing countries are based on establishing a new international economic order and ensuring equal participation in the digital globalization process to achieve people's well-rounded development in the digital society.The relationship between cross-border data flows and the realization of digital development rights in developing countries is quite complex.Currently,developing countries seek to safeguard their existing digital interests through unilateral regulation to protect data sovereignty and multilateral regulation for cross-border data cooperation.However,developing countries still have to face internal conflicts between national digital development rights and individual and corporate digital development rights during the process of realizing digital development rights.They also encounter external contradictions such as developed countries interfering with developing countries'data sovereignty,developed countries squeezing the policy space of developing countries through dominant rules,and developing countries having conflicts between domestic and international rules.This article argues that balancing openness and security on digital trade platforms is the optimal solution for developing countries to realize their digital development rights.The establishment of WTO digital trade rules should inherently reflect the fundamental demands of developing countries in cross-border data flows.At the same time,given China's dual role as a digital powerhouse and a developing country,it should actively promote the realization of digital development rights in developing countries.

Legislation to Regulate the Working Hours and Labor Intensity of Practitioners in the Platform Economy

Under the employment model of online car-hailing platforms,the extension of working hours and increase of labor intensity for practitioners are driven by the orders from these platform companies and labor-related third parties.Also,they are more attributable to the internal driving force of practitioners themselves who hope to have more orders and earn more.It is impossible to apply the regulation system of the existing labor law to protect the rights and interests of employees in terms of working hours and labor intensity.The author suggests that the state should make special labor legislation to make the following targeted provisions:Online car-hailing platform companies and labor-related third parties that implement labor management and control over practitioners shall,on the premise of abiding by labor standards and industry rules,set various reasonable indicators of working hours and labor intensity through rules and take effective technical measures to control these two dimensions,so that practitioners can avoid serious overwork.Besides,by encouraging the provision of certain convenience for practitioners to take intermittent breaks,jointly building a compatibility system for different online car-hailing platforms,and establishing relevant operating rules,we can restrain practitioners from being seriously overworked.This is actually a multi-cooperative boosting legislative regulation approach.

Human Rights as Unique Rights——an analysis of Raz's Political Concept of human Rights

The practice of international human rights has led to the development of the political notion of human rights in contemporary times and triggered the theoretical reflection on"what are human rights"The natural rights view,which is based on human nature,regards human rights as universal moral rights owned by everyone against all others.holding a different perspective from the natural rights view,Raz,the representative of the political notion of human rights,bases his view on the political function of human rights in restricting national sovereignty in international practice and defines human rights as the legal rights enjoyed by everyone against the country since the end of the World War ii,which should be enforced by fair and reliable international institutions.Unavoidably,Raz’s concept of human rights has been subject to questioning and criticism by natural right theorists.The controversy around Raz’s concept of human rights shows that:on one hand,the Western academic circle has not readied a basic consensus on the understanding of human rights based on international human rights practice;on the other hand,it deeply reveals the theoretical need for the international community to reach a basic consensus on international human rights practice in the historical context of the changing international legal order.

The Rationale for Victims' Cooperation in Cases of Pleading Guilty and Accepting Punishment from the Perspective of Protecting the Right of Action

In the context of the more frequent application of the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment,the connotations of the rules on victim involvement should be enriched in the 2018 Criminal Procedure Law.Victims deeply influenced by the concept of cooperative justice will also have an intention to cooperate,thus resulting in a rationale for victims’cooperation.Victims’cooperation features a subjectivity of interactivity,understanding,and constraint.This kind of cooperation faces the accused,the procuratorial organ,and the court.The jurisprudential function of the rationale for cooperation of victims is embodied in such aspects as recognizing the victims as eligible subjects,enhancing the legal force of the recognizance in a case of pleading guilty and accepting punishment,and consolidating the legitimate basis for victim to obtain legal assistance.Oriented to protecting right of action of the victim,understanding and developing the rationale for the cooperation of the victim can start by reaching a judicial consensus on the"two limits"principle,optimizing the right of action system for victims,achieving the interconnection of multi-level litigation systems,and improving the rules on lenient punishment to enrich the plan for protecting victims’right of action in cases of pleading guilty and accepting punishment.