While fundamental individual rights are unquestionably taken as subjective rights, the same does not happen with fundamental social rights. If they are subjective rights, they are justiciable. The main argument in fav...While fundamental individual rights are unquestionably taken as subjective rights, the same does not happen with fundamental social rights. If they are subjective rights, they are justiciable. The main argument in favor of this understanding is based on liberty. The main argument against is the so called formal argument. In relation to the pro argument, liberty can be either juridical or factual. Juridical liberty has no value without factual liberty, because the right to liberty is only put into practice if one has the factual preconditions for its exercise. The argument against is that their justiciability displaces the competence of the elaboration of public politics from Legislative and Executive to Judiciary Power, what violates the principles of separation of powers and democracy. Nevertheless they are subjective rights indeed, but special ones： they are primafacie subjective rights. There is only one subjective right that is a priori considered definitive： the right to Existenzminimum） Its content is not settled, but it is quite unequivocal that the rights to simple housing, fundamental education and minimum level of medical assistance are part of it. Existenzminimum is then related to the minimum necessary for factual liberty. Against the justiciability of fundamental social rights, there are also arguments related to juridification of politics, administrative discretion and the possible reserve clause. The counter-arguments refer to original and exceptional competence, necessary objective proof of state＇s economical incapability, prohibition of State＇s will, principles of legality and of non-obviation o f Judiciary jurisdiction, Existenzminimun guarantee.展开更多
The anchoring effect is a powerful and widespread cognitive phenomenon in the decision-making field.Our quantitative analysis of a sample of 520 sentences indicates that the sentencing recommendation of the public pro...The anchoring effect is a powerful and widespread cognitive phenomenon in the decision-making field.Our quantitative analysis of a sample of 520 sentences indicates that the sentencing recommendation of the public procuratorate has a marked influence upon the court＇s sentencing judgment.That is,whether we are investigating the freedom penalty,the fine penalty or the term of probation imposed by the judge,we find that the anchoring effect does exist.In addition,a change in the court conviction or in the trial sentencing circumstances and the availability of a defense lawyer may weaken the anchoring effect of the procuratorate＇s sentencing recommendations.As a form of cognitive bias,the presence of the anchoring effect in the area of sentencing further highlights the necessity of applying analyses based on legal realism to the field of criminal justice in China;and at the institutional level,it demands that judges adopt corresponding arrangements to ensure the impartial exercise of discretion.展开更多
文摘While fundamental individual rights are unquestionably taken as subjective rights, the same does not happen with fundamental social rights. If they are subjective rights, they are justiciable. The main argument in favor of this understanding is based on liberty. The main argument against is the so called formal argument. In relation to the pro argument, liberty can be either juridical or factual. Juridical liberty has no value without factual liberty, because the right to liberty is only put into practice if one has the factual preconditions for its exercise. The argument against is that their justiciability displaces the competence of the elaboration of public politics from Legislative and Executive to Judiciary Power, what violates the principles of separation of powers and democracy. Nevertheless they are subjective rights indeed, but special ones： they are primafacie subjective rights. There is only one subjective right that is a priori considered definitive： the right to Existenzminimum） Its content is not settled, but it is quite unequivocal that the rights to simple housing, fundamental education and minimum level of medical assistance are part of it. Existenzminimum is then related to the minimum necessary for factual liberty. Against the justiciability of fundamental social rights, there are also arguments related to juridification of politics, administrative discretion and the possible reserve clause. The counter-arguments refer to original and exceptional competence, necessary objective proof of state＇s economical incapability, prohibition of State＇s will, principles of legality and of non-obviation o f Judiciary jurisdiction, Existenzminimun guarantee.
基金Supported by the Philosophy and Social Sciences Foundation of Shanghai(No.:2017BFX001)Shanghai’s Outstanding Young Talents Projects
文摘The anchoring effect is a powerful and widespread cognitive phenomenon in the decision-making field.Our quantitative analysis of a sample of 520 sentences indicates that the sentencing recommendation of the public procuratorate has a marked influence upon the court＇s sentencing judgment.That is,whether we are investigating the freedom penalty,the fine penalty or the term of probation imposed by the judge,we find that the anchoring effect does exist.In addition,a change in the court conviction or in the trial sentencing circumstances and the availability of a defense lawyer may weaken the anchoring effect of the procuratorate＇s sentencing recommendations.As a form of cognitive bias,the presence of the anchoring effect in the area of sentencing further highlights the necessity of applying analyses based on legal realism to the field of criminal justice in China;and at the institutional level,it demands that judges adopt corresponding arrangements to ensure the impartial exercise of discretion.
