当前位置:首页 > 刊物 > 亚洲法与社会杂志
亚洲法与社会杂志
《亚洲法与社会杂志》目录(2021)Volume 8, Issue 2
2021年12月07日 【作者】中国法与社会研究院 预览:

【作者】中国法与社会研究院

【内容提要】


一、JUDGING AND JUDGMENT IN CONTEMPORARY ASIA

当代亚洲的审判与判决

Judging and Judgment in Contemporary Asia: Editor’s Introduction to this Special Issue

David Engel,纽约州立大学布法罗分校


Abstract

Although the figure of the wise judge may be a universal trope, respect is not automatically accorded every person who passes judgment on another. To be perceived as legitimate, judges must occupy an institutional status with the power to decide controverted cases and must have access to specialized or even sacred knowledge and moral authority. Historically, Asian judges could claim legitimacy through their connection to transcendent legal principles, such as dhamma or dao or shari’a. In contemporary Asia, however, conceptions of law and legal legitimacy have become pluralistic, contested, and contradictory. Judges may to some extent retain a connection to the sacred and the transcendent, yet that connection is no longer sufficient in itself to insulate their judgments—or their character—from criticism. How, then, can the “good judge” be distinguished from judges who fall short of the mark? In this Special Issue, five distinguished scholars explore the crisis of legitimation as it affects judging and judgment in Sri Lanka, India, China, Indonesia, and Thailand.


摘要:

虽然明智的法官形象可能是一个普遍的套路,但并不是每个对他人作出裁决的人都会自动得到尊重。为了被认为是合法的,法官必须占据一个机构地位,有权决定有争议的案件,并且可以获得专门的甚至是神圣的知识权威和道德权威。在历史上,亚洲的法官可以通过他们与超验的法律原则,如佛法、道法或伊斯兰教法的联系来主张合法性。然而,在当代亚洲,法律和法律合法性的概念已经变得多元化、富有争议并矛盾重重。法官可能在某种程度上保留了与神圣和超验的联系,但是这种联系本身已不足以使他们的判决——或者他们的品行——[1] 免受批评。那么,如何将“好法官”与那些不够好的法官区分开来?在本期特刊中,五位杰出的学者探讨了影响着斯里兰卡、印度、中国、印度尼西亚和泰国的审判和判决的合法性危机。


Keywords: judge, judgment, legitimacy, sacred law, rule of law

关键词: 法官,审判,合法性,神圣的法律,法治


Judging in the Buddha’s Court: A Buddhist Judicial System in Cotemporary Asia
在佛庭里审判:当代亚洲的一个佛教司法系统

Benjamin Schonthal,新西兰奥塔哥大学教授,奥塔哥法律与社会中心联席主任


Abstract:

Drawing on textual and ethnographic research conducted over the last five years, this article analyses an important genre of judicial practice in South and Southeast Asia that has been almost entirely ignored by socio-legal scholars: Buddhist systems of judging. Using the judicial system of one monastic group in contemporary Sri Lanka as a case-study, it argues that Buddhist judging requires more than just the internalization of moral principles, as is often assumed. According to Buddhist (monastic)principles of judging, legal procedures—similar to those used in state legal settings—are equally essential. These procedures govern everything from making legal complaints, to the structuring oftrials, to determining jurisdiction, and many other topics. By examining Buddhist judicial systems, this article not only casts new light on the pluri-legal landscape of Asia; it also offers new reflections on the intersection of religion-based and state-based systems of law in the contemporary world.


摘要:

本文根据在过去五年里进行的文本和民族志研究,分析了一个几乎完全被法社会学学者忽视的南亚、东南亚司法实践中的重要类型,即佛教的司法审判系统。本文以当代斯里兰卡一个僧侣团体的司法系统为例,试图说明佛教的审判不仅仅需要像人们常说的那样将道德原则内在化。根据佛教(寺院)的审判原则,宗教法与国家法同样注重法律程序的重要性。这些程序规定了从提出法律申诉、到组织庭审、再到确定管辖权以及别的很多问题。通过对于佛教司法系统的研究,本文不仅对亚洲的多元法律格局提供了新的看法,而且对当代世界基于宗教的法律体系和基于国家的法律体系的交集提供了新的反思。



Keywords: Buddhism, law, judges, courts, South Asia, Southeast Asia
关键词:佛教,法律,法官,法院,南亚,东南亚


From Mythic Saviours to #MeToo at the Indian Supreme Court

从神话中的拯救者到印度最高法院中的#MeToo

Deepa Das Acevedo,阿拉巴马大学法学院


Abstract:

The Indian Supreme Court has long enjoyed an almost mythic reputation for progressive and creative jurisprudence, but a series of recent scandals is beginning to erode this well-settled authority. One of the most troubling of these incidents has been an allegation of sexual harassment and intimidation by a Court staffer against then sitting Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi. This article draws on media analysis and ethnographic research conducted in the immediate aftermath of the “CJI Scandal” to explore what it means for judges and judging in contemporary India. I argue that the justices’ response to the allegations are part of a broader shift in Indian judging. Far from being the product of an institution imbued with mythic qualities, judging in India is increasingly coming to represent an example of mythos, or “an assertive discourse of power and authority … something to be believed and obeyed.”


摘要:

长期以来,印度最高法院因为其进步性和创造性的法律适用[2] 几乎享有神话般的声誉,但是最近的一系列丑闻正开始侵蚀这一坚实的权威。其中最令人不安的事件之一是一名法院工作人员对时任印度首席大法官(CJI)兰詹·戈戈伊(Ranjan Gogoi)的性骚扰和恐吓指控。本文运用在“CJI丑闻”发生后立即开展的媒体报道分析和民族志研究,探讨它对于当代印度的法官和审判意味着什么。我试图说明,大法官们对指控的回应是印度司法界更为广泛的转变的一部分。印度的审判远不是一个充满神话色彩的机构的产物,而是越来越代表了一个信念,或者说“权力和权威的独断话语……一种被相信和服从的东西”的例示。


Keywords: Indian Supreme Court, #MeToo, Ranjan Gogoi, judicial autonomy, sexual harassment

关键词: 印度最高法院,#MeToo,兰詹·戈戈伊,司法自主权,性骚扰


“What Gets Measured Gets Done”: Metric Fixation and China’s Experiment in Quantified Judging

“所测即所得”:指标依赖与中国的审判量化实验

Kwai Hang Ng,加州大学圣地亚哥分校教授

Peter C.H. Chan,香港城市大学助理教授


Abstract:

This article analyzes the ambitious Case Quality Assessment System (CQAS) that the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) promoted during the first half of the 2010s. It offers a case-study of Court J, a grassroots court located in an affluent urban metropolis of China that struggled to come out ahead in the CQAS competition. The article discusses how the SPC quantified judging and the problems created by the metricization process. The CQAS project is analyzed as a case of metric fixation. By identifying the problems that doomed the CQAS, the article points out the challenges facing the a-u-t-h-o-r-i-t-a-r-i-a-n regime in subjecting good judging to quantitative output standards. The CQAS is a metric that judges judging. It reveals how judging is viewed by the party-state. The article concludes by discussing the legacy of the CQAS. Though it nominally ended in 2014, key indicators that it introduced for supervising judges are still used by the Chinese courts today. The CQAS presaged the growing centralization that the Chinese judicial system is undergoing today. Though the SPC has terminated the tournament-style competition that defined the CQAS, the metric remains the template used to evaluate judging.


摘要:

本文旨在分析中国最高人民法院(SPC)于2010 年代前期推行的宏伟的案件质量评估体系(CQAS)。个案研究为位于中国某富裕大都市的基层法院J法院,该法院在CQAS的竞赛中脱颖而出。本文讨论了最高院是如何量化审判的,以及指标化的过程中产生的问题。在本文中CQAS被作为一个指标依赖的案例分析。在识别出种种令CQAS最终走向终结的问题后,本文将指出一个国家在将好的审判受制于量化标准时所面对的挑战。CQAS是一个用来判断审判的指标体系。它揭示了党国体系对于审判的理解。本文最后将讨论CQAS的遗产。尽管CQAS在名义上于2014年结束,但是其用于监督法官的关键指标至今仍旧为中国的法院所沿用。CQAS预示了中国司法系统目前正在经历的集权化过程。尽管最高院终止了CQAS带来的锦标赛式竞争,但这个指标体系依然是用来评估审判的一个模板。

Keywords: judging, judgement, metric, professionalism, China

关键词: 审判,判决,测量指标,职业主义,中国


What Makes a Good Judge? Perspectives from Indonesia

什么是好的法官?来自印度尼西亚的视角

Simon Butt, 悉尼大学亚洲及太平洋法律中心主任、印度尼西亚法教授


Abstract:

In May 2018, Artidjo Alkostar retired from the Supreme Court of Indonesia after a judicial career spanning almost two decades. Over this period, he presided over many of Indonesia’s most prominent and controversial criminal cases and became renowned for routinely rejecting corruption appeals and increasing prison sentences. In the celebratory publications that marked his retirement, Alkostar was held up as a model judge, with senior legal figures, including Supreme Court judges, singling out his strong work ethic, integrity, simplicity of character, and firmness. Curiously absent from the list of praiseworthy attributes were pre-requisites for effective judging, including adequate legal knowledge, transparent legal reasoning and decision-making, objectivity and avoiding the perception of bias. An analysis of Alkostar’s most notorious decisions suggests that he, and the judges who served with him, did not always clearly display these pre-requisites. This article considers what this says about judging in Indonesia and what might, in practice, be the defining characteristics of a good judge there.


摘要:

2018年5月,Artidjo Alkostar 在历经近二十年的司法生涯后,从印度尼西亚最高法院退休。在此期间,他裁判了许多印度尼西亚最著名和具争议性的刑事案件,以常拒绝贿赂案件的上诉并且加重刑罚而闻名。在庆祝他退休的出版物中,Alkostar被奉为模范法官。包括最高法院法官在内的许多资深法律人士均强调他良好的职业道德、正直、朴实和坚定的性格。有趣的是,在他的受到称赞的特征中缺少进行有效判决的前提,包括足够的法律知识、透明的法律推理和决策过程、客观性和避免偏见的影响等。对Alkostar作出的最臭名昭著的判决的分析表明,他以及协助他的法官并不一直能清楚地展示以上特征。本文将探讨此发现对印度尼西亚裁判的揭示,以及在实践中什么可能是印度尼西亚一名优秀法官的决定性特征。


Keywords: Indonesia, courts, corruption, criminal law, judicial performance

关键词:印度尼西亚,法院,腐败,刑法,司法性能


Punitive Processes? Judging in Thai Lower Criminal Courts

惩罚性程序?泰国初级刑事法院的审理

Duncan McCargo,哥本哈根大学政治学教授、北欧亚洲研究所主任


Abstract:

This article examines how Thai courts of the first instance deal with run-of-the-mill criminal cases. How do judges deal with criminal trials of a rather routine nature, often involving defendants from ethnic minorities and reflecting the particular conditions in the provinces concerned? Drawing on participant observation and interview research conducted mainly in two provinces in different regions of the country, the article examines the challenges faced by judges and court officials in dealing with heavy caseloads in a highly bureaucratized system where acquittal rates are extremely low. How far do such cases shed light on how judging is carried out in the majority of Thai courts? What kind of challenges do Thai judges face in adjudicating minor but often messy cases in order to fulfil societal expectations in line with their own understandings of justice?


摘要:

本文探讨了泰国初审法院是如何处理普通刑事案件的。法官如何处理相当常规的,通常涉及少数民族被告并反映有关省份特殊情况的刑事审判?基于主要在该国不同区域的两个省份进行的参与式观察和访谈研究,本文探讨了法官和法院官员在一个高度官僚化的、无罪释放率极低的系统中处理大量案件时面对的挑战。这类案件在多大程度上揭示了大多数泰国法院的审理是怎样进行的?为了根据他们自己对于正义的理解来满足社会的期待,泰国法官在裁决一些次要但是往往棘手的案件时会面临怎样的挑战?


Keywords: lower courts, criminal cases, legal ethnography, hostile environment, Thailand

关键词: 初级法院,刑事案件,法律民族志,敌对环境,泰国




二、LEGAL TRANSPLANTS IN CONTEMPORARY ASIA

当代亚洲的法律移植

Legal Transplants in Contemporary Asia: Foreword

当代亚洲的法律移植:前言

Setsuo Miyazawa,神户大学、加州大学黑斯廷斯法学院


The term “legal transplant” refers to the movement of a rule or a system of law from one jurisdiction to another. The term has been widely used in studies of legal development and change since it was introduced by Allan Watson, a Scottish scholar in Roman law and comparative law, in 1974.The jurisdiction in which the transplanted legal rule or legal system originated is usually called a “donor,” while the jurisdiction in which the given legal rule or legal system is transplanted is usually called a “recipient.”

“法律移植”一词是指一个法律规则或者法律系统从某一法域向另一法域迁移的活动。自从1974年苏格兰的罗马法和比较法学者艾伦·沃森(Allen Watson)[3] 采用这一概念以来,该术语已广泛用于法律发展与变迁方面的研究。被移植的法律规则或法律系统的发源地通常被称为“供体”,而被移植的法律规则或法律系统的接受方通常被称为“受体”。[4] 

When legal transplant in an Asian jurisdiction was analyzed, the donor was usually a non-Asian jurisdiction or organization.However, Japan has been engaging in several legal assistance activities in Asian jurisdictions since the mid-1900s,while there is an evaluation about China under President Xi Jinping that “Western donors now face competition from China, not only for economic development projects, but in legal development assistance, too.”When I was involved in organizing sessions at the 4th Annual Meeting of the Asian Law and Society Association (ALSA) that was to be held at Osaka University in Toyonaka, Japan, on 13–15 December 2019, I thought that inter-Asian legal transplants might be a good topic and circulated the following call for papers on 6 June 2019:

当分析亚洲某个法域的法律移植时,供体通常来说是一个非亚洲的法域或组织。然而,日本自1900年代中期以来一直在亚洲法域从事一些法律援助活动。而当下有一种对于习近平主席领导下的中国的评价是:“西方供体正在面临来自中国的竞争,这不仅在经济发展项目中,也体现在法律发展的援助中。”当我参与组织于2019年12月13日至15日在日本丰中市大阪大学举行的亚洲法律与社会协会(ALSA)第四届年会会议时,我认为亚洲内部的法律移植可能是一个好话题,并在2019年6月6日发出了以下论文征集通知:

Asia used to be receivers of legal transplants, but recently some Asian countries, most notably China and Japan, have appeared as donors of legal transplants. In such donor activities, national, scholarly, and practical interests are intertwined, and different ideas on “the rule of law” in general or the most appropriate system for the given issue compete with each other. Those who are interested in this topic are kindly requested to send me a 500-word abstract by July 15.

亚洲曾经是法律移植的继受者,但最近一些亚洲国家(最明显的是中国和日本)看上去已经成为法律移植的供体。在这些供体的活动中,国家利益、学术利益和实际利益相互交织,关于一般意义上的“法治”或者面向特定问题的最恰切之制度的不同观点相互竞争。诚望对这一主题感兴趣的学者于7月15日前给我发一份500字的摘要。

Nine proposals were accepted and two sessions on legal transplant were held on 13 December 2019. Rob Leflar and Amy H. Shee kindly participated as discussants. This symposium issue includes three of those papers, each of which has been extensively revised after the meeting and through the peer-review process of this Journal.

九个论文草稿被接受并且在2019年12月13日举办了两场关于法律移植的专题会议。罗布·勒弗拉(Rob Leflar)和艾米·H·希(Amy H. Shee)作为与谈人欣然参加。本期专题会议特刊刊载了其中三篇论文,每篇论文都在会后进行了广泛修改并通过了本刊的同行评议程序。

Aziz Ismatov, in “Do Hybrid Legal Systems Matter in Foreign Legal-Aid Programmes? Some Philosophical Aspects of Legal Aid in Uzbekistan as Provided by the Donor States,” compares the relative effectiveness of donor activities by the three consecutive donor countries, namely the US, Germany (EU), and Japan, particularly within the hybrid structure of the Uzbek law, which bears many traces of the USSR legal system and an indigenous and informal Islamic law. Aziz states that while “ideas, values, and practices promoted by the US and, partly, EU legal-aid projects still lack adequate cultural compatibility and credibility with Uzbekistan’s government and society,” “Japanese legal-technical assistance/co-operation is fundamentally different” in that “it puts a specific emphasis on the mutual understanding of society, distinctive culture, and history,” including a “soft and flexible” attitude regarding “human rights and democracy.”

阿齐兹·伊斯马托夫(Aziz Ismatov)在论文《混合型法律体系在外国法律援助计划中重要吗?供体国在乌兹别克斯坦提供法律援助的一些原理性[5] 问题》中,比较了美国、德国(欧盟)和日本连续三个供体国,尤其是在乌兹别克斯坦法律体系这种带有很多苏联法律、本土法律以及非正式伊斯兰法律的痕迹的混合结构中,其法律移植活动的相对有效性。阿齐兹指出,虽然“美国以及部分的欧盟法律援助项目所倡导的观点、价值观和实践与乌兹别克斯坦政府和社会之间仍然缺乏足够的文化兼容性和可信度”,但是“日本的法律-技术援助/合作是根本不同的”,因为“它特别强调对社会、独特文化和历史的相互理解”,包括对于“人权和民主”采取“柔软和灵活”的态度。

Matthew S. Erie and Do Hai Ha, in “Law and Development Minus Legal Transplants: The Example of China in Vietnam,” present a case-study of the legislative process of the SEZ (Special Economic Zone) Bill in Vietnam that was initiated in 2014 and suspended in 2018.Erie and Ha argue that “the most remarkable aspect of borrowing from the Chinese experience was the proactive involvement of the Vietnamese state in developing its SEZs” and that “the Vietnamese government received extensive technical support from Chinese experts.” However, they describe that “[t]he SEZs Bill triggered considerable criticism” and “the most vocal criticism normally came from economists, including domestic, diasporic, and sometimes international experts.” Finally, “[i]n May 2018, a month before the SEZs Bill was scheduled for passage, criticism against the Bill exploded,” “demonstrations involving hundreds or thousands of people took place in major cities and provinces across the country,” and “as a result, the SEZs Bill has been postponed indefinitely.” After presenting hypotheses regarding positive and negative factors on the successful legal transplants from China, the authors conclude that “if China is to emerge as a successful contender in the law-and-development market, it will likely resort to other means, in addition to legal transplants, to secure its investments abroad,” including

马修·S·伊利(Matthew S. Erie)和都海哈(Do Hai Ha),在《法律和发展减去法律移植: 以中国在越南为例》一文中呈现了对越南经济特区法案的立法过程的案例研究。该法案的立法进程于2014年启动但在2018年中止。伊利和哈认为,“借鉴中国经验的最显著方面是越南政府积极主动地参与发展其经济特区”,“越南政府从中国专家那里得到了广泛的技术支持”。然而,他们描述道:“经济特区法案引发了相当多的批评”,“最强烈的批评通常来自于国内的、侨居的、有时还包括国际的经济学家。”最终,“2018年5月,在《经济特区法案》预定通过前一个月,针对该法案的批评爆发了”,“全国各主要城市和省份发生了涉及数百或数千人的示威活动”,“结果,《经济特区法案》被无限期推迟”。在提出影响中国成功进行法律移植的积极和消极因素的假设后,作者得出结论:“如果中国将成为法律和发展市场上的成功竞争者,除了法律移植外,它可能会采取其他的手段来保证其海外投资”,包括:

greater vertical integration of Chinese norms into international economic law and the building of cross-border transnational law, mainly in the form of inter-corporate agreements, international arbitration, and onshoring commercial disputes, each of which is formative of CLD [Chinese Law and Development].

以公司间协议、国际仲裁和商业纠纷回岸为主要形式,将中国的规范更大程度地纵向融入国际经济法,并建立跨境跨国法律,其中每一种都是CLD[中国法律与发展]的雏形。[6] 

Yuka Kaneko, in “Land-Law Reforms in Vietnam and Myanmar: ‘Legal Transplant’ Viewed from Asian Recipients,” presents a very different paper: she strongly criticizes the reform of positive law by the recipient government based on legal transplants in general for its destruction of traditional rights based on “living law” that has existed among people in affected areas. She traces the process of the introduction of the concept of “land-use right” in Vietnam and the concept of “land-use right for cultivation” in Myanmar, their impact to weaken traditional perpetual right for cultivation and to increase the transferability of farm land, and the rise of resistance and disputes involving affected farmers, with an additional analysis of the failure or insufficiency of mechanisms to solve or prevent disputes. A wide variety of donors appear, including the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, Japan, the United Nations, and the US, but the problem is not specific donors, but the introduction of positive law that ignores traditional living law. The author states that

金子由香(Yuka Kaneko)的《越南和缅甸的土地法改革:从亚洲继受国看'法律移植'》是一篇非常与众不同的论文:她强烈批评继受国政府基于法律移植进行的实定法改革,因为它破坏了在受影响地区的人民中一直存在的基于“活法”的传统权利。她追溯了越南引入“土地使用权”概念和缅甸引入“耕地使用权”的概念的过程以及它们产生的影响,包括削弱传统的永久耕地权、增强了农田的可转让性、以及导致涉及受影响农民的反抗和纠纷增加,并且另外分析了解决或者预防纠纷的机制的失败或者不足。各种各样的供体出现了,包括世界银行、亚洲开发银行、日本、联合国和美国,但是问题不在于特定的供体而在于实定法的引入忽略了传统的活法。作者认为,

[n]ow, in the era of the contemporary “legal transplant,” donors intervene while loudly advocating the protection of small farmers and customary law but, in fact, their legal designs are leading to the commercialization of farmland, through the freedom of disposal, land-expropriation law, vacant-land nationalization, and city-planning law, which draws farmland into the land market.

现在,在当代的“法律移植”时代,供体一边干预一边大力鼓吹保护小农和习惯法,但是事实上,通过处置自由、土地征用法、空地国有化和城市规划法,他们的法律设计正在导致农田的商业化,从而将农田引向土地市场。

She concludes the paper by arguing that

她在论文的结尾提出:

when the legislative processes of Asia and Africa are freed from the restraint of “legal transplant,” it may be possible to save the self-contradiction of modern capitalist law from the constraint of belief in perpetual growth and social evolution, through which the human race is placing an excessive load upon the global environment.

当亚洲和非洲的立法过程摆脱了 "法律移植 "的束缚,就有可能将现代资本主义法律的自相矛盾从对于永久增长和社会进化的信仰中解救出来,正是在这种信仰下,人类对于全球环境造成了过度的负担。

Together, these papers present careful case-studies of inter-Asian legal transplants as well as a call for the recognition of living law as a source of law superior to positive law based on legal transplants. I trust that readers will enjoy and learn much from these papers.

这些论文共同呈现了对于亚洲内部进行的法律移植的细致的案例研究,并且呼吁承认活法是优于基于法律移植的实定法的法律来源。我相信读者会享受这些论文并且从中学到很多。


Keywords: Legal transplants, Asian law

关键词: 法律移植,亚洲法


(脚注略)


Do Hybrid Legal System matter in Foreign Legal-Aid Programmes? Some Philosophical Aspects of Legal Aid in Uzbekistan as Provided by the Donor States

混合型法律体系在外国法律援助计划中重要吗?法律捐助国在乌兹别克斯坦提供法律援助的一些原理性问题

Aziz Ismatov,名古屋大学亚洲法律交流中心


Abstract:

Since the fall of socialism in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, and some states of Southeast Asia, the international financial institutions and individual donor states have initiated wide-scale legal-aid programmes to assist these states in their transition from socialism to a market economy. Whereas the aid from financial institutions vis-à-vis recipient states is often agreed upon specific conditionalities, the donor states design their foreign legal aid according to individual preferences, although sometimes with references to universal goals. Currently, various donor states provide legal aid to Uzbekistan. Given the fact that Uzbekistan is the former Soviet Republic that still bears multiple traces of a socialist legal system and additionally integrates indigenous informal law, this research provides an analysis of how different donor states base their legal-aid activities on entirely different philosophies and levels of gravity, and how receptive the hybrid structure of Uzbekistan’s law is towards such aid.


摘要:

自从东欧、前苏联和东南亚一些国家的社会主义衰落以来,国际金融机构和一些法律捐助国启动了大规模的法律援助计划,以协助这些国家从社会主义向市场经济过渡。金融机构对于法律受援国的援助往往是以达到特定条件为前提达成的。法律捐助国尽管有时会参考普遍性的目标,但往往是根据它们的自身偏好来设计对外的法律援助。目前,各种法律捐助国向乌兹别克斯坦提供法律援助。鉴于乌兹别克斯坦是前苏维埃共和国,它至今保留着社会主义法律体系的多种痕迹,并且还融合了本土的非正式法律。本研究分析了不同的法律捐助国是如何将其法律援助的活动建立在完全不同的原理和不同的程度[7] 之上,以及乌兹别克斯坦法律的混合结构对于此类援助的接受程度如何。

Keywords: Donor states, international financial institutions, foreign aid

关键词: 法律援助国,国际金融机构,外国援助


Law and Development Minus Legal Transplant : The Example of China in Vietnam
法律与发展的法律移植缺位:以中国在越南为例

Matthew S. Erie,英国牛津大学中国研究中心副教授

Do Hai Ha,英国牛津大学中国研究中心博士后


Abstract:

Legal transplants are broadly recognized as one of the main mechanisms by which donor states influence the legal development of recipient states. The experience of China, however, challenges convention. While, in recent years, China has been one of the largest capital-exporting countries in the world and has mobilized law to protect its investment in high-risk recipient states, legal transplants have, to date, not played a major role in China’s approach to law and development. This article examines this puzzle through the case of China’s participation in formulating Vietnam’s 2018 SEZ Bill. In doing so, this article sets forth a number of hypotheses as to why Chinese law has thus far not assumed the form of legal transplant. The example of the SEZ Bill demonstrates how Chinese legal transplants depend as much on the “pull” of recipient states as they do on the “push” of the donor. The case-study of the SEZ Bill raises important questions not only for Chinese law and development, but also, more generally, for the viability of “second-order” legal transplants: those from an Asian donor to an Asian recipient.


摘要:
法律移植被广泛认为是捐助国影响受援国法律发展的一种主要机制。然而,中国经验却挑战了这一认知。诚然,近些年中国已经成为世界上最大的资本输出国之一,并且动员法律来保护其在高风险受援国的投资,但是迄今为止,法律移植在中国的法律与发展方案中并没有发挥主要作用。本文通过中国参与制定越南2018年经济特区法案的案例来研究这一谜题。在此过程中,本文提出了一些假设来阐明中国法迄今尚未采取法律移植的形式的原因。经济特区法案的例子表明,中国的法律移植既取决于捐助国的“推力”,也同等取决于受援国的“拉力”。经济特区法案的案例研究不仅对中国的法律与发展提出了重要的问题,而且更广泛地对“二阶”法律移植的可行性进行了探讨,即从亚洲捐助国到亚洲受援国的法律移植问题。


Keywords: law and development,legal transplant,China,Vietnam,industrial policy,SEZ

关键词:法律与发展,法律移植,中国,越南,产业政策,经济特区


Land-Law Reforms in Vietnam and Myanmar: “Legal Transplant” Viewed from Asian Recipients

越南和缅甸的土地法改革:从亚洲接受者角度看“法律移植”

Yuka Kaneko,神户大学教授、社会系统创新中心


Abstract:

This paper focuses on the conflict of norms in the interface between the “transplanted” formal law and the local social norms in the land-law reforms in Vietnam and Myanmar, each representing different legal families, while sharing commonness in that both have attempted law-making in the post-colonial independence period in order to restore the basis of the livelihoods of the local population. Both of the legal concepts of “land-use right” (quyen su dung dat) in Vietnam and “land-use right for cultivation” (loat paing kwint) in Myanmar have been the product of law-makers’ restorative attempts at farmland security, while intentionally avoiding usage of the term “ownership” that would result in the capitalist transaction of land as a commodity. However, the contemporary land-law reforms led by donor-oriented “legal transplant” in these countries have resulted in the plunder of such policy, by reintroducing the same mechanisms of land exploitation as existed in the colonial days. Roaring protests of the local agricultural population seem to be a rising-up of the social norm descended from the immemorial past as an unwritten Constitution to bring an end to the centuries-long movement of “legal transplant” of the modern capitalist law.


摘要:

本文着眼于越南和缅甸的土地法改革中“移植”的正式法与当地社会规范间的交互。这两个国家代表了不同的法律谱系,但共性在于它们都试图在后殖民独立时期立法以恢复当地居民的生计基础。越南的“土地使用权”(quyen su dung dat)和缅甸的“耕种土地使用权”(loat paing kwint)这两个法律概念皆是立法者试图恢复农地安全,同时有意避免使用“所有权”一词,以免土地被作为一种商品开展资本主义交易的产物。然而,在这些国家中由法律捐助国所主导的“法律移植”所引起的当代土地法改革,却重新引入了与殖民时期相同的土地剥削机制,从而导致了对这一政策的掠夺。当地农业人口的激烈抗议,仿佛是远古时代以来作为一种不成文宪法传承的社会规范,为了结束长达数个世纪的现代资本主义法律的“法律移植”运动而重新抬头。


Keywords:legal transplant,Vietnam land law,Myanmar land law,land-law reform,law and development

关键词: 法律移植,越南土地法,缅甸土地法,土地法改革,法律与发展