【作者】法的社会视野

【内容提要】

Asian Journal of Law and Society

【编者按】《亚洲法与社会杂志》（Asian Journal of Law and Society）是由上海交通大学中国法与社会研究院（CISLS）及其前身法社会学研究中心（LSC）为凯原法学院与剑桥

大学出版社合作出版的全英文学术期刊。目前订购数超过8500户，其中超过6000是机构订户。仅在剑桥出版社的期刊平台，仅在2018年，这份新兴期刊的全文下载数就达到10000

次以上。据最近获得的权威信息，本刊在SCOPUS引文数据库排行榜已经上升到第二方阵，也已经被纳入ESCI (Emerging Scholars Citation Index)引文数据库，并有望在2021年左右

达到SSCI (Social Sciences Citation Index) 数据库的收录标准。

本期集中推送杂志第6卷第1期（2019年5月）的目录，以方便读者查阅和引用，也可方便研究者了解本刊录用稿件的方针和特色。欢迎大家积极参与全英文学术期刊Asian Journal 

of Law and Society的建设，在这个平台上构筑一个跨学科、跨国界的知识共同体！

中国政法系统的意识形态及制度

Ordering Power under the Party: A Relational Approach to Law and Politics in China
党的执政秩序：中国政法关系研究

作者：Juan Wang，麦吉尔大学政治学系副教授；Sida Liu，多伦多大学社会学和法学系助理教授

摘要：Existing scholarship of China’s legal institutions has primarily focused on individual institutions, such as the court, the police, or the legal profession. This article proposes a

relational approach to the study of political-legal institutions in China. To understand the order and exercise of power by various political-legal institutions, the relational approach 

emphasizes the spatial positions of actors or institutions (the police, courts, lawyers, etc.) within the broader political-legal system and their mutual interactions. We suggest that

 the changing ideas of the Chinese leadership about the role of law as an instrument of governance have shaped the relations between various legal and political institutions.

 The interactions of these political-legal institutions (e.g. the “iron triangle” of the police, the court and the procuracy) further reveal the dynamics of power relations at work.

现有的关于中国法律制度的学术研究主要集中在个别制度上，如法院、公安或者法律职业。本文提出了一种研究政治法律制度的关系方法。为理解各项政治法律制度的权力秩序和

行使情况，关系方法强调行为者或机构（公安、法院、律师等）在更广泛的政治法律制度体系中的空间位置及其相互作用。我们认为，中国领导人关于法律作为一种治理工具的观

念的转变，塑造了各种法律和政治机构之间的关系。这些政治法律机构（如公安、法院和检察院的“铁三角”）的互动进一步揭示了权力关系的动态实践。

Political-Legal Order and the Curious Double Character of China’s Courts
政治法律秩序与中国法院奇特的双重性

作者：Ling LI，维也纳大学东亚研究/汉学系

摘要：This article provides an analytical account of how politics and law in China are organically integrated in the institutional architecture of courts as designed by the Chinese 

Communist Party (“the Party”). This design allows the Party to retain its supreme authority in the interpretation, application, and enforcement of the law through its institutional

 control over courts. At the same time, the Party can, under this design, also afford to grant an autonomous sphere where courts can perform their adjudicative functions with

 minimal interference from the Party, as long as the Party is assured of full authority to determine the scope of the “autonomous-zone,” to impose rules on it, and to revoke it

 when necessary. Consequently, courts assume a double character: a pliant political agent on the one hand and a legal institution of its own agency on the other.

本文对于在中国，政治和法律如何在中国共产党（“党”）设计的法院制度结构中有机地结合在一起，提供了分析性说明。这种设计使党能够通过对法院的制度控制，在法律的解释

、适用和执行方面保留最高权力。同时，在这种设计之下，只要党能保证充分的权力确定“自治区”的范围，以及给法院制定规定并在必要情况下撤销“自治区”，党也可以赋予法院

一定自治范围，使法院在不受党干预的情况下履行审判职能。因此，法院具有双重特性：一方面是顺从的政治代理人，另一方面是具有能动性质的法律机构。

Creating a Virtuous Leviathan: The Party, Law, and Socialist Core Values
创造道德的利维坦：政党、法律和社会主义核心价值观

作者：Delia LIN，墨尔本大学亚洲研究所中国研究高级讲师；Susan TREVASKES，澳大利亚格里菲斯大学中国研究教授

摘要：In recent years, the Chinese Communist Party has declared that its governance must dominate over all aspects of law-making and enforcement, declaring that its leadership 

must be implemented across the entire process of governing the country in accordance with the law. Contemporaneous to this new way of thinking about the law-Party nexus is a

 propaganda push to integrate moral values into the law. This paper is about moralizing governance in the Xi Jinping era. It explores the ideology behind the promotion of this

 morals–law integration, focusing on the Socialist Core Values in the legal realm under the current Xi Jinping administration. We do so from two interrelated perspectives. The 

first examines the relationship between law and morality. Here, we argue that the Party’s calls for a law–morality amalgam can be understood as a form of “pan-moralism.” The

 second looks at the supremacy of Party rule, extending the theory of the “Leviathan” proposed by Thomas Hobbes to take into account the Party’s morality push. This

 two-pronged argument enables us to assert that the Xi Jinping administration is creating a “virtuous Leviathan.”

近年来，中国共产党宣布党必须领导立法和执法的各个方面，并把党的领导贯彻到全面依法治国的全过程。与这种新的法律-政党关系思考方式同时进行的是一项将道德价值观纳入

法律的宣传活动。本文旨在探讨习近平时代的治理道德化问题。它着眼于当前习近平执政时期法律领域的社会主义核心价值观，考察了促进这种道德与法律融合的背后的意识形态

。本文从两个相互关联的角度展开。第一部分研究了法律与道德之间的关系，认为党对法律道德的呼吁可以被理解为“泛道德主义”。第二部分着眼于党的统治至上原则，通过拓展托

马斯·霍布斯提出的“利维坦”理论，来解释党的道德建设。因此，我们认为习近平政府正在创造 “道德的利维坦”。

研究论文

Judicial Reasoning and Review in the Indonesian Supreme Court
印尼最高法院的司法推理与审查

作者：Simon BUTT，悉尼大学法学院印度尼西亚法教授，悉尼大学法学院亚洲及太平洋法律中心副主任

摘要：This article describes and critiques the judicial reasoning of Indonesia’s Supreme Court, through the lens of the Court’s reviews of subnational laws during 2011–17. The

 resulting picture is a negative one. Most of the Court’s decisions were critically flawed, with either very little or no reasoning, and inconsistencies with past decisions. Worse, 

the Court appears keen to avoid hearing important cases that raise difficult political issues, even though the law governing those issues is clear and easy to apply. These

 inadequacies are perpetuated by genuine uncertainty about the precise jurisdiction of the Court in judicial review cases. However, the Court has not sought to resolve this

 uncertainty. Indeed, these decisions appear to reflect a court paying little regard to judicial transparency and accountability, and unwilling or unable to act as an effective 

check on government power.

本文通过印度尼西亚最高法院对2011-2017年度地方法律的审查来描述和批判该法院的司法推理，得到的结果不尽人意。法院的大多数判决都存在严重缺陷，很少或根本没有推

理，而且与过去的判决不一致。更糟糕的是，法院似乎在尽力避免审理可能引发棘手政治问题的重要案件，即使有关这些问题的法律明确易行。由于法院在司法复审案件中管辖

权的不确定性，这些不足长期存在。但是，法院并未试图解决这种不确定性。实际上，这些判决似乎反映出法院很少考虑司法透明和司法问责，并且不愿或不能对政府权力实行有效审查。

The Way to Understand the Nature and Extent of Judicial Independence in China
中国司法独立性质和程度的理解路径

作者：Yanrong ZHAO，中国政法大学民商经济法学院讲师

摘要：In order to portray the true extent of judicial independence in China’s judicial practices, this article first clarifies the contested meanings of “judicial independence” within 

Chinese judicial circles and provides a detailed literature review of the main school of thoughts on the extent of judicial independence in China. In contrast to the existing

 literature—most of which sees judicial independence in China as stagnant—this thesis suggests employing the strategic interaction approach to study the development of 

impartial adjudication in China and argues that the extent of adjudicative independence is evolving with the amount of judicial discretion afforded by the Chinese Communist

 Party (CCP) to judges.

为了描述司法独立在中国司法实践中的真实程度，本文首先阐明了中国司法界对“司法独立”这一争议概念的理解，并提供了关于中国司法独立程度主要思想流派的详细文献综

述。与现有文献相反（大多数文献认为司法独立在中国处于停滞状态），本论文建议采用战略互动方法（strategic interaction approach）来研究中国公正审判的发展，并认为

司法独立的程度随着中国共产党赋予法官的自由裁量权的变化而变化。

Judicial Remedies for Forced Slum Evictions in Bangladesh: An Analysis of the Structural Injunction
孟加拉国关于强迫迁离贫民窟的司法救济：对结构性禁令的分析

作者：S M Atia NAZNIN, 澳大利亚麦考瑞大学博士研究生、孟加拉国BRAC大学法学院讲师；Shawkat ALAM，澳大利亚麦考瑞大学教授、环境法中心主任

摘要：The adoption of weak remedies, such as declarations or recommendations by the Bangladesh Supreme Court in litigations on state-induced forced slum evictions,

 significantly contributes to the tardy implementation of court orders. In this context, there is a growing global consensus on the structural injunction—a remedy that

 enables judges to monitor and bring about governmental compliance with judicial orders of social rights litigation. The Bangladesh Supreme Court faces several real

 and compelling challenges relating to its constitutional authority and institutional capacity that hinder remedial innovation. Through examining relevant constitutional

 provisions, judicial approach, and comparative examples, this article argues that the court has the capacity to overcome these constraints. Thus, it advocates judicial 

reform in Bangladesh to offset the state’s often arbitrary interference with the basic necessity of housing of the slum dwellers.

孟加拉国最高法院在关于国家强迫迁离的诉讼中采用的软弱的救济措施，例如宣言或建议，极大程度上造成了法院命令的缓慢执行。针对这种情况，关于结构性禁令

（structural injunction）的全球共识正在日益增长，这种救济措施使法官能够监督并促使政府遵守社会权利诉讼中的司法命令。孟加拉国最高法院在其宪法权威和机构

权能方面面临着一些现实而严峻的挑战，这些挑战阻碍了救济方面的创新。通过审查相关的宪法规定、司法方法和案例比较，本文认为法院具有克服这些限制的能力

。因此，本文主张在孟加拉国进行司法改革，以弥补该国对贫民窟居民住房基本必要条件的经常性的任意干预。

The Choice of Norms in Courtroom Adjudication in Vietnam: In Search of Legitimacy in a Socialist Regulatory Context
越南法庭审判中的规范选择：在社会主义监管的背景下寻求正当性

作者：Thi Quang Hong TRAN，越南社会主义共和国司法部法律科学研究院研究员

摘要：Notwithstanding its defining feature of normative pluralism, the socialist state of Vietnam basically adopts a legal centralist approach to regulation. The judiciary

 is arguably the most illustrative of this approach, since it is the main forum where legal centralism encounters normative pluralism. Our research examines the choice

 of norms in judicial adjudication in Vietnam to check the effectiveness of its legal centralist approach. It finds that, despite lacking institutional support, judges managed

 to apply customary norms at their discretion against the state’s emphasis on top-down legal rules. A legitimacy-based analysis explains this phenomenon. It points out

 that judges conceptualized their legitimacy under the influence of both legal and extra-legal rules, thus making it apart from the legality. Judges attempt to bridge 

the gap between legitimacy and legality enabled de factor normative pluralism. In looking at the influence of customary norms over judicial adjudication, the article 

aims to make both theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, it enriches the scholarship of normative pluralism by showing how legitimacy-building keeps 

normative pluralism effective, irrespective of the dominating legal centralism. Practically, it proffers insightful implications for the ongoing court reforms in Vietnam

 based upon the findings.

尽管有着规范多元化这一典型特征，越南，作为一个社会主义国家，还是基本上遵循法律中心主义进行监管。这一路径在司法中得到了最有力的体现，因为司法是法律

中心主义邂逅规范多元主义的主要平台。本文研究了越南司法裁判中的规范选择，以检验其法律中心主义路径的效力。本文发现，尽管缺乏制度上的支持，法官还是设

法酌情适用习惯法，而非国家注重的自上而下的法律规则。对此现象可以进行基于正当性的分析。本文指出，法官是在法律规则以及法律之外规则的共同影响下理解正

当性，从而使其与合法律性相区分。法官试图弥合正当性与合法律性之间的鸿沟，这在事实上导致了规范多元主义。本文旨在考察习惯法对于司法裁判的影响，从而在

理论和实践两个层面做出贡献。就前者而言，本文通过展现尽管法律中心主义占据着主导地位，但是对正当性的寻求使得规范多元主义持续发生效力，从而丰富了规范

多元主义的学术讨论。就后者而言，本文对越南正在行进中的法院改革具有深刻的启示。

Lay Participation in Taiwan: Observations from Mock Trials
我国台湾地区民众参审制度：来自模拟庭审的观察

作者：Mong-Hwa CHIN，台湾交通大学法学院副教授

摘要：This article introduces the designs and the potential problems of the new lay judge system in Taiwan. This article first describes the background of the development

 of lay participation in Taiwan, and the 2012 Observer Jury System and the 2018 Lay Judge System drafted by the judiciary. The core of this paper is a qualitative study

 of four mock trials conducted by four district courts in Taiwan. Through observations and interviews with mock trial lay judges, this article addresses three main problems

 of the new system, including professional judges’ domination in deliberations, the comprehensibility of law, and lack of evidence rules. It also provides a discussion of 

the possible solutions to the problems observed. This article urges that training sessions should be provided to both lay judges and legal professionals, adjust the discovery

 rule, provide guidance on sentencing, and create evidentiary rules.

本文介绍了我国台湾地区的新型民众参审制度（Lay Judge System）的设计，以及潜在的问题。本文首先介绍了我国台湾地区民众参审制度发展起来的背景，和司法

部门设计的2012年的陪审观察员制度（Observer Jury System）和2018年的民众参审制度。本文的核心部分是对于我国台湾地区四个地方法院举行的四场模拟庭审

进行的定性研究。通过对于模拟庭审的非职业法官的观察和访谈，本文探讨了该项制度尚存在的三方面主要问题，包括：专业法官在案件审议中的主导地位、法律

的可理解性，以及证据规则的缺失。本文提出了以上这些问题的可能解决路径：同时给非职业法官和法律专业人士提供培训课程，调整证据发现规则（the discovery rule）

，提供量刑指导，创制证据规则。

书评

Lay Participation in Japan
日本的大众司法参与

图书：Masahiro Fujita, Japanese Society and Lay Participation in Criminal Justice (Singapore: Springer, 2018) pp 282. Hardcover: $169.

作者：Rieko KAGE

Lay Participation in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Spain
日本、韩国、我国台湾地区和西班牙的大众参与

图书：Rieko Kage, Who Judges? Designing Jury Systems in Japan, East Asia and Europe (Cambridge: University Press, 2017) pp 264. Hardcover: $74.00.

作者：Luke NOTTAGE

Social Movements and Civil Governance in Hong Kong
香港的社会运动和民事治理

图书：Michael H. K. Ng & John D. Wong, Civil Unrest and Governance in Hong Kong: Law and Order from Historical and Cultural Perspectives (New York, NY: Routledge, 2017) pp 230. Hardcover: $119.00.

作者：Kyle GALINDEZ

Community Sanctions and Disciplinary Governance in China
中国的社区惩罚和纪律治理

图书：Qi Chen, Governance, Social Control and Legal Reform in China: Community Sanctions and Measures (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018) pp 269. Hardcover: $129.

作者：Xiaoyu YUAN

Crime and Criminal Justice in Japan
日本的犯罪和刑事正义

图书：Jianhong Liu & Setsuo Miyazawa, eds., Crime and Justice in Contemporary Japan (Cham: Springer, 2018) pp 352 . Hardcover: $169.

作者：Peter GRABOSKY

Corporate Governance in Asia
亚洲的公司治理

图书：Dan W. Puchniak, Harald Baum, & Luke Nottage, eds., Independent Directors in Asia: A Historical, Contextual and Comparative Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017) pp 634. Hardcover: $155.00.

作者：Sang Yop KANG

Theory on the Relational Normativity of International Law (TORNIL)
国际法中的关系性规范理论

图书：Matthias Vanhullebusch, Global Governance, Conflict and China (Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2018) pp 476 . Hardcover: $183.00.

作者：Amy Huey-Ling SHEE