The Governance of Complementary Global Regimes Dealing With War and Crime:The Interaction Between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court

The establishment of an international judicial institution responsible to verify on a case-by-case basis when serious humanitarian crimes would fall within the competence of domestic judicial authorities,and when an international judiciary would be required is a visible accomplishment advocated for years.The important paradigm shift refers to governing the transitional challenges characterizing massive humanitarian escalations in conflict and post-conflict situations between the responsibility to protect civilians and the fight against the impunity of international crimes.In the current legislation of the UN the civilian protection duties are associated to the maintenance of peace and security and to the right of intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign States for humanitarian reasons,extending further the reach of a criminal jurisdiction to punish the perpetrators.This has been the case in Darfur,Sudan,and Libya.Both these situations have been referred by the UN Security Council to the International Criminal Court(ICC).From an empirical perspective,it is still not demonstrated whether international criminal justice would have an impact on the maintenance and restoration of international peace and security,while its complementary role with global political regimes is in transition and deserves attention.The questions arising are as follow:how to rely on international criminal justice for the preservation,maintenance,and restoration of peace and security in extreme conflict zones,without solving the governance gaps during mass atrocity escalations characterized by jurisdictional referrals?Is this realistic considering the traditional concept of international security relying on old models of militarization,such as in the case of Libya?Are there political and strategic reasons for a postponement of accountability during such humanitarian interventions?In short,what kind of public authority is desired for the emerging regime of international criminal justice,and how would such tool function in the complexity of international governance?

Racial Disparities in the United States Criminal Justice System:“With Liberty and Justice for All?”

Racial discrimination remains a prevalent issue in the contemporary U.S.despite efforts to promote equality.Many young African American and Hispanic males are easy target for law enforcement agents.Minorities experience a higher and more unfair form of racial discrimination,racial profiling,police brutality,unfair sentencing,and mass incarceration for offences which are the same or less than those committed by White males.The rate of incarceration in the United States is five to eight times higher than most developed countries,and Black males constitute the largest percentage of inmates in the U.S.prison system.Once arrested,Black Americans are more likely to remain in prison longer,and await trial for minor offenses at a higher rate than Whites.Black and Latino males sentenced in state and federal courts face significantly greater odds of incarceration than White offenders for the same or even higher crimes.Vagins and McCurdy in a 2006 ACLU on“cracks in the system”reported that“There is no rational medical or penological reason for the 100:1 disparity between crack and powder cocaine and instead it causes an unjustified racial disparity in our penal system”(p.7).There is a racial disparity in the proportion of Black males in prison serving sentences of life without the possibility of parole(LWOP).In addition,The United States Criminal Justice System needs to be carefully examined as a top priority agenda needing immediate call of action that needs reform to guarantee the constitutional rights accorded to every American“with liberty and justice for all”.

From "Criminal on Death Row" to "Acquittal of Charge"——A showcase of China's human rights protection in the administration of justice

In Januaury 1996, a case of murder shocked the seat of Qiaojia County in Yunnan Province. Eight years later, in February 2004, the county town was again astir with the news that the alleged murderer Sun Wangang returned home after being acquitted of the murder charge.

Globalization of Criminal Justice and Human Rights Basic Dilemma

In this era of dramatic,rampant,and incessant political change,predictions about the future can no longer be based either on conventional wisdom or historical precedent.Criminals have learned to take advantage of the dynamic globalization and the opening of borders in new and dangerous ways.In response to the global crime and human rights problems,this paper is an introduction to some of these developments in criminal justice system to fight crimes and to prevent human rights.Furthermore,this paper will also examine“sense of justice in criminal process”,and identifies“basic dilemma”problems in existing legal of criminal justice and human rights.It contains a series of new ideas that a disruptor to the judiciary system and policy-maker reforms aid in the prevention of criminalization to citizen rights and change impacts the criminal justice system to protect human rights to be seen globalization change justice for societies.

Objects of Criminal Legal Aid--Center On Judicial Justice and Human Rights Protection

The object of criminal legal aid refers to the person in a criminal case who has the right or eligibility toapply for legal assistance and who receives it. According to jurispru- dence, the object （or aid recipient） is a party in a given legal case, who is granted legal aid. They are often among the disadvantaged group in criminal cases, since most of them are mentally challenged, lack free- dom or have health problems.＇ Both international and domestic laws have certain norms regarding objects of criminal legal aid. Our domestic law places more emphasis on ＂defen- dants＂ while downplaying ＂suspects＂ and ＂victims＂ in identifying objects.

论Criminal Justice的汉语翻译问题——兼与曹立群教授商榷

英语中的criminal justice一词是犯罪学中最为关键的概念之一,它至少有3方面的含义:作为工作系统;作为专门活动;作为研究领域。将这个术语翻译为"刑事司法"是比较恰当的,而将其翻译为"法务学"或者"刑事审判",都是不恰当的。

Crime and Race： A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of Hispanic Males and Criminality

The focus of this study is the critical analysis of data related to Hispanic males and criminality, Factors, such as marital status, income level, age, and police contact, are measureable entities that are at the core of the statistical ,analysis, A cross-disciplinary approach provides a cultural context for the statistical world of numbers, The socially conflicting terms of masculinity and maleness will lead to a discussion of macho behavior and criminaliW, Macho behavior, often interpreted as aggressive, may arouse police suspicion, In this case, the police will stop Hispanic males because of their behavior, not necessarily because they committed a crime, This study will show that the cycle of poverty prevents Hispanic males of low-income families from contacting with the police, whereas uneducated Hispanic males must confirm their masculinity in a criminal behavior, CriminaliW, often associated with violence as machismo, is the social over compensation for a male inferiority complex that finds its origin in the Spanish conquest of South America,

Perfection of the legislation of the crimes by the Chinese elderly

The nineteenth session of the Standing Committee of the Eleventh National People＇s Congress in February 25, 2011 approved the ＂PRC Criminal Law Amendment （eight）＂, which for the first time added the provision of the lenient punishment for the elderly crimes. The provision filled the legislative blank of the criminal responsibility of this special group of the old people in the criminal law of our country. But at the same time, we should also clearly see the deficiencies of the amendment （eight）. This paper attempts to sort out the rationality of the lenient application of the punishment on the older people from the aspect of the criminal policy oftemperingjustice with mercy and other aspects, and to construct and perfect the specific legislative proposals that the amendment （eight） puts forward.

英文词汇在法学教学中的应用--以law,justice,criminal等词为例

法学源自西方,许多法律词汇的教学如果借助其英文表达将会事半功倍。像"法律"这样的基本法学概念,借助英文law能够更准确地揭示其内涵;像"司法"这样的法律理念,借助英文justice能够更深刻地传达其精神;像criminal(罪犯)这样的法律术语,借助中英文的不同表达,更容易让学生在比较中把握中西法律文化的不同。

Juvenile Criminal Justice Reform Regarding to Children's Welfare

Juvenile criminal justice is a reflection of the new approach to children and criminal penalty. The juvenile justice reform is onginated from the changes in criminal penalty and the approach to children. When criminal penalty is no longer pure revenge, education and individualization dominate criminal penalty; when children are regarded as being different from adults and should be treated differently, the new approach to children is taking shape and made more scientific. The orientation of juvenile criminal justice reform is to differentiate the juvenile crimes from adult crimes, set up case heating organizations, methods and treatment measures that are appropriate with the psychology of children. This paper will give an analysis of the current reform of the juvenile criminal justice in conjunction with the development of juvenile justice systems of other countries and probe into the orientation and development trend of the reform of China＇s juvenile criminal justice.

轻罪时代刑事司法柔性治理

轻罪时代,面对社会治理现代化的新要求与我国当前犯罪态势逐渐呈现出明显的轻罪化趋势,刑事司法应对犯罪逐渐从以偏重事后惩罚威慑向注重事前预防、多方协同、深化诉源精准治理、多措并举的“治罪”与“治理”相结合的标本兼治观念转变。“依法有效治理犯罪与强化人权司法保障”是我国刑事司法治理的核心任务,实践中通过贯彻“少捕慎诉慎押”政策与适用“认罪认罚从宽”“社区矫正”等制度,展现了犯罪治理的新思维与新作为,但也存在一些与刑事司法柔性治理要求相抵牾并亟待解决的问题。为了积极回应人民群众对公平正义的新期待与准确把握大量轻罪入刑后“法益保护”与“人权保障”之衡平问题,刑事司法就须明确把“以人为本”作为犯罪治理的根本价值遵循,并将“宽缓、审慎、谦抑”理念贯穿于犯罪治理的全过程。

《刑事诉讼法》第四次修改与中国特色未成年人司法的发展完善

《刑事诉讼法》对于我国未成年人司法的发展起到了重要的支撑与引领作用,中国特色未成年人司法具有与刑事诉讼紧密捆绑的阶段性特征。更好地调整《刑事诉讼法》与未成年人司法之间的互动关系,以推动我国未成年人司法的进一步发展完善,应当作为《刑事诉讼法》第四次修改中涉未成年人部分修改的基本立场,并处理好两个整体性问题。一是通过吸收未成年人专门法律的普适性内容、根据其他涉未法律的新规定新增或调整专章规定、为其他法律中新增的涉未制度提供程序支撑和吸收已有司法解释或规范性文件的合理内容,来有效对接其他涉未法律规范。二是通过减少刑事诉讼整体框架和普通程序对涉未特别程序的限制,明确与成年人案件规定的梯级递进关系,来处理好与普通程序的关系。本次修改还应当整体增补与未成年被害人相关的规定,对转处制度和犯罪记录封存制度进行体系化与优化,并明确低龄严重暴力犯罪核准追诉程序的基本设置。

论涉罪企业合规的刑行衔接

涉罪企业合规刑事司法与行政执法的有效衔接,是企业合规预防违法犯罪功能得以完整实现的必然要求。企业合规刑行衔接关涉刑事合规整改监督评估衔接、合规不起诉后的接续监管衔接以及其他相关企业合规建设衔接三个方面。为保障刑事合规企业合规预防功能、激励功能的充分实现,检察机关需要与行政机关加强理念沟通、操作配合,优化刑行衔接机制,推动涉罪企业及关联企业、行业企业的合规建设。

刑事司法领域自动化决策的风险与规制

自动化决策在中外各国的刑事司法领域已有广泛应用,其原因在于自动化决策符合刑事司法预防和打击犯罪、提高诉讼效率、实现案件公正办理的需求,也有相应的观念和技术条件予以支持。然而自动化决策在刑事司法中的应用可能带来准确性不足、公正性偏离和机械性三方面的风险,应采取措施对自动化决策进行规制,以达到补足准确性、保障公正性和消解机械性的效果,实现自动化决策在刑事司法领域的法治化应用。

推进监察执法与刑事司法有机衔接

监察执法与刑事司法有机衔接,作为党的二十届三中全会提出的部署要求,具有确保反腐败格局中职能责任的依法履行、确保反腐败法网密织及流程贯通、确保反腐败执法司法公平公正的时代价值。推进监察执法与刑事司法有机衔接,亟需从理论上回应“结构平衡说”“监察中心主义说”等学术争议。其一,构建以监察执法为主导的监察执法与刑事司法衔接结构形式。应当从反腐败格局中的职责定位来深刻把握腐败治理与社会治理在刑事诉讼领域的差异,深刻把握党的自我革命引领社会革命的政治逻辑。其二,明确监察执法与刑事司法衔接的主体责任。该主体责任是建立在监察机关履行反腐败法定职能基础之上的监察机关与审判、检察、公安及相关执法特定机构和人员所承担的法法衔接职责和义务。其三,完善监察执法与刑事司法衔接机制,主要包括监察机关在查办职务犯罪案件中与审判机关的协调配合机制,如证据审查认定、审判信息通报配合等,以及与检察机关的衔接机制,如重大疑难案件提前介入、案件移送等,其要旨是通过监察执法与刑事司法的配合制约,确保反腐败执法司法在法治轨道上运行。

人工智能时代我国刑事司法改革的双重使命

人工智能时代,我国刑事司法改革面临确保司法规律遵循和科学技术运用的双重使命。需要强化检察机关对侦查行为的监督,平衡侦查机关使用大数据技术与保护公民权利之间的关系;坚持控辩平等,并通过建立公共技术服务平台,实现控辩双方在数据获取上的权利平衡;在审判领域,应建立以审判为中心的诉讼制度,坚守法官中立性和决策核心地位,确保人工智能技术辅助的正确应用,同时注重算法的透明性和可解释性,并尊重被告人的选择权,合理限制人工智能辅助系统的案件适用范围。

刑事诉讼卷宗电子化公开的制度设计

刑事诉讼卷宗电子化公开是全面落实依法治国的法治要求,是实现司法公正的现实需求,是推进法学教育和法学研究的有力方式。当前有关刑事诉讼卷宗电子化公开存在立法层级较低,分散不统一,诸多实体性规范不具可操作性,电子化进程缓慢,全国统一电子化平台尚未形成等不足,有必要制定一部包容刑事诉讼卷宗公开的信息公开法。新法应从明确刑事诉讼卷宗电子化公开的范围、规范刑事诉讼卷宗电子化公开的程序、界定刑事诉讼卷宗电子化公开的期限以及加强刑事诉讼卷宗的集中管理方面进行制度设计,使刑事诉讼卷宗电子化公开更加规范化。

英国少年司法中电子监控的实践及其启示

在未成年人刑事司法中对未成年人适用电子监控措施符合贯彻“少捕慎诉慎押”刑事政策以及实行轻缓化多元处遇的刑事司法目标。英国少年司法在对未成年人适用电子监控方面建立了相应的制度并积累了丰富的实践。在制度方面,英国少年司法规定了在保释、刑事判决令、非刑事判决令三类情形中可以适用电子监控。在实践层面,依托英国“多机构合作支持”的少年司法体系,形成了“决定—实施—违规应对”的完整电子监控运作流程。以英国少年司法的经验与存在的问题为参考,结合本国国情,我国未成年人刑事司法有必要从理念、制度与实践三个层面努力,将电子监控扩大至审前的非羁押措施与附条件不起诉制度中对未成年人进行适用。

生成式人工智能赋能数字检察的路径、风险与纾解

数字时代,生成式人工智能技术成为发展人工智能刑事司法的重要技术力量。理论层面,数字检察改革以数字技术推动法律监督模式改革为核心的理念与生成式人工智能技术具备融合基础。应用路径层面,生成式人工智能可从构建应对预测性侦查的法律监督模式、完善类案监督机制、辅助认罪认罚量刑建议程序、赋能检察机关参与社会治理方面为数字检察改革提供技术支撑。由于技术的两面性,在风险层面,生成式人工智能数字检察可能会引发司法“工具主义”、技术风险因素、非传统国家安全风险问题,可从保证检察人员的司法亲历性、搭建联盟区块链破除数据壁垒、算法监管与安全法治体系建设并重等路径纾解应用风险,推动生成式人工智能赋能数字检察,助力检察机关成为实现数字时代国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的重要力量。

轻罪治理背景下酌定不起诉的扩张适用

近二十年的司法实践表明,我国犯罪结构已发生显著变化,轻罪案件占比大幅上升,轻罪治理模式成为刑事法治和社会治理的未来走向。基于慎诉的刑事司法政策而一定程度地扩大酌定不起诉的适用,能够有效发挥不起诉制度的审前分流功能,符合我国轻罪治理的情势需要和中国式刑事司法现代化的发展方向。在制度基础已具备的前提下,我国应通过适度扩展并规范起诉裁量范围与标准,以满足慎诉目的下的合理需求;通过与认罪认罚从宽制度的深度融合、加强刑罚替代措施的有效适用、完善权力监督审查机制,增强起诉裁量权扩张的正当性、合目的性与可接受性,在中国式刑事司法现代化建设的背景之下,为更新我国酌定不起诉制度提供可替代的优化方案。