The PAN Hongbin case raised to the academic circles the question of how to connect with the court proceedings after the People’s Congress filed for review.The solution to this problem should focus on the functional p...The PAN Hongbin case raised to the academic circles the question of how to connect with the court proceedings after the People’s Congress filed for review.The solution to this problem should focus on the functional positioning of China’s recording and review system,whether it involves the specific rights of citizens in individual cases.From the actual situation in China,the development trend of the constitutional review systems in various countries in the world,and the attitudes of the National People’s Congress and the academic circle,the protection of civil rights should be one of the functions of record review.According to the relevant provisions of the Legislative Law and the Law on the Supervision of Standing Committees of People’s Congresses at Various Levels,our courts should construct a dual complementary mechanism for review requests from the Supreme People’s Court and review recommendations from local people’s courts at all levels in the litigation process.Meanwhile,according to the retrospective theory of the law,the filing review filed by the parties after the court ’s lawsuit should be retroactive to the parties themselves,and the law should provide for a system to initiate retrial proceedings in this case to relieve the parties’ rights.展开更多
To defend the explanatory power of the choice theory of rights,choice theorists have put forward the impossibility theorem,the proposition of moral priority,and the redundancy theory of rights to deny the existence of...To defend the explanatory power of the choice theory of rights,choice theorists have put forward the impossibility theorem,the proposition of moral priority,and the redundancy theory of rights to deny the existence of inalienable rights.However,the impossibility theorem confuses power and privilege and breaks through basic legal relations;the proposition of moral priority shifts from the importance of rights to the absoluteness of rights by refusing to recognize the“threshold”of rights;the redundancy theory of rights ignores the“severity increasing effect”of rights.Therefore,the accusation made by choice theorists is groundless.展开更多
基金a phased result of the Research on the Jurisprudence,Operation and Effectiveness of Constitution Publicity,a research project of humanities and social sciences launched by Chongqing Municipal Education Commission. The project No. is 19SKCH017
文摘The PAN Hongbin case raised to the academic circles the question of how to connect with the court proceedings after the People’s Congress filed for review.The solution to this problem should focus on the functional positioning of China’s recording and review system,whether it involves the specific rights of citizens in individual cases.From the actual situation in China,the development trend of the constitutional review systems in various countries in the world,and the attitudes of the National People’s Congress and the academic circle,the protection of civil rights should be one of the functions of record review.According to the relevant provisions of the Legislative Law and the Law on the Supervision of Standing Committees of People’s Congresses at Various Levels,our courts should construct a dual complementary mechanism for review requests from the Supreme People’s Court and review recommendations from local people’s courts at all levels in the litigation process.Meanwhile,according to the retrospective theory of the law,the filing review filed by the parties after the court ’s lawsuit should be retroactive to the parties themselves,and the law should provide for a system to initiate retrial proceedings in this case to relieve the parties’ rights.
基金a phased result of the important project“A Research of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s Important Statement on Respecting and Safeguarding Human Rights”(No.228ZD004)supported by National Social Science Fund of Chinathe SWUPL student scientific research innovation project of 2021(No.2021XZXS-070)。
文摘To defend the explanatory power of the choice theory of rights,choice theorists have put forward the impossibility theorem,the proposition of moral priority,and the redundancy theory of rights to deny the existence of inalienable rights.However,the impossibility theorem confuses power and privilege and breaks through basic legal relations;the proposition of moral priority shifts from the importance of rights to the absoluteness of rights by refusing to recognize the“threshold”of rights;the redundancy theory of rights ignores the“severity increasing effect”of rights.Therefore,the accusation made by choice theorists is groundless.
