共同犯罪附带民事诉讼问题/闵涛

作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-07-23 09:19:54   浏览:9479   来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载
共同犯罪附带民事诉讼问题

闵涛


  民事诉讼中,法院并不需要对共同侵权的被告按份划分责任,而是判决其承担连带责任即可,待实际承担赔偿责任后由承担了连带责任的被告再向其他共同侵权人追偿。在共同犯罪案件附带民事诉讼中,有人主张同样判各附带民事被告人承担连带责任即可,因为连带责任属于民事责任的范畴。笔者认为,刑事附带民事诉讼有其自身的特点,并不完全等同于民事诉讼。在承担连带责任的前提下,有必要对各附带民事被告人的赔偿份额也一并作出判决,即按各共犯在共同犯罪中的地位、作用及其刑罚情况确定其对损害结果的原因力的大小,按其作用大小确定其应承担的民事赔偿数额;有的没有能力承担其应承担的份额时,由其他附带民事被告人承担。就是说,各附带民事被告人的民事赔偿责任以按份承担为基础,以连带承担为保障。采用这种方法处理的主要理由有以下几点:
  首先,刑事责任与民事责任应相一致。被害人的损害虽是共同犯罪被告人共同告诉 结果,但各被告人对损害后果的作用常常有很大的区别,如有的持刀杀人、有的站脚助威,刑事责任正是这种作用的反映。刑法和民法本质上都体现公平原则,具有惩恶扬善的功能,因此,被告人的刑事责任与其民事责任是一致的,即刑罚重的其民事责任亦相对较大,刑罚轻的其民事责任相对较小。由于刑事附带民事诉讼中刑事责任已经确定,就有必要对民事责任的大小也进行区分,这样才能体现出法律的公正和法律内在逻辑的一致性。
  其次,刑事附带民事诉讼的后果是同时解决刑、民两种责任。判决生效后,被告人被判处禁监刑的要投入监狱执行,判处死刑的要被处决。在这种情况下,民事责任的执行如果按照民事诉讼的模式,即某一罪犯承担了全部民事责任,再向其他罪犯追偿,几乎是不可能的。因为罪犯在监狱服刑,不便于进行诉讼,委托律师办理又要高额的代理费;同时,原没有承担民事责任的被告人通常没有赔偿能力,其服刑期间没有经济来源亦不能履行。实践中没有人会投入巨大的诉讼成本去寻求不能实现的利益。因此,在刑罚已确定的情况下区分各附带民事被告人民事责任的大小,有利于保护原告人和被告人的合法权益,也有利于减轻当事人和法院的负担。
  第三,刑事被告人由于被羁押,其民事责任在通常情况下由其亲属代为办理,要由被告人亲属配合。因此,明确各共犯的赔偿数额有利于被告人亲属的理解和支持,有利于执行,从而有利于保护被害人的权益。
  第四,设立连带责任的目的是为了充分保护债权人的利益,每一个债务人都具有向债权人清偿全部债务的义务。各附带民事被告人首先按份承担责任,当有的被告人不能承担其应承担的份额时,有能力承担的其他被告人有义务代为承担,以保证被害人债权的实现。



下载地址: 点击此处下载

卫生部办公厅关于在全国部分地区开展脊髓灰质炎强化免疫活动的通知

卫生部办公厅


卫生部办公厅关于在全国部分地区开展脊髓灰质炎强化免疫活动的通知


卫办疾控发[2002]94号

各省、自治区、直辖市卫生厅局,中国疾病预防控制中心:
为巩固我国无脊髓灰质炎证实成果,进一步消除免疫空白人群,我部决定于今冬明春继续在全国部分重点地区开展强化免疫活动。为组织好此次强化免疫活动,现将有关要求通知如下:
一、各级卫生行政部门要切实加强对此次活动的组织和领导,并积极争取政府的重视与支持,保证必要的经费投入。
二、各地要根据《2002/2003年度全国部分地区开展脊髓灰质炎强化免疫活动实施方案》(详见附件),制定本省的具体实施计划并严格执行。
三、各地要集中人力、物力保证强化免疫活动的质量。认真做好宣传动员,精心组织,周密安排,确保每名适龄儿童尤其是流动人口中的儿童都能得到免疫,严防强化免疫走过场。
四、各地在活动结束后,要及时进行工作总结,并将强化免疫活动开展情况书面报告我部。
五、此次活动所需疫苗由我部提供,具体分配方案另告。
为掌握活动开展情况,届时我部将派专家组赴相关地区参加现场具体工作。

附件:附件:2002/2003年度全国部分地区开展脊髓灰质炎强化免疫活动实施方案


二○○二年十月十五日



WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism

------An Analysis of the DSU in Positivism



by
Chengwei, Liu




Foreword
This book is a systematically selected compilation of Reports issued by various panels and the standing Appellate Body, then adopted by the DSB under the WTO jurisdiction by the end of May 2002, in category of subjects such as causes of action, initiation of panel proceedings, function of panels, rules of evidence and special rules governing anti-dumping disputes, etc., which are in most cases ruled as “preliminary issues” or “procedural objections”. However, this book is not intended to be exhaustive. It deals only with issues in dispute settlement proceedings under the WTO jurisprudence that the author considers the more important, where such rules are mainly concerned as Art. XXIII of the GATT 1994; Arts. 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 21.5, 23, 26 of the DSU; Arts. 17.4, 17.5, 17.6 of the AD Agreement and Arts. 31, 32 of the Vienna Convention and so on.
Moreover, this book is intended to be descriptive and positive rather than prescriptive and theoretical. Most of the author’s analysis benefits much from the precise and logically organized reports by panels and the Appellate Body, administered by the DSB under the WTO jurisdiction. It must be made clear that these reports do not constitute binding “subsequent practice” referred to in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, nor do they operate as stare decisis, panels and the Appellate Body are therefore not bound by past reports. Nevertheless, it does be the case demonstrated by the DSB practice that, relevant reasoning in a particular case has been cited or followed frequently by another panel or confirmed by the Appellate Body in subsequent cases.
As ruled by the Appellate Body in Japan-Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages (DS44), “[a]dopted panel reports are an important part of the GATT acquis. They are often considered by subsequent panels. They create legitimate expectations among WTO Members, and, therefore, should be taken into account where they are relevant to any dispute”. Furthermore, a panel could nevertheless find useful guidance in the reasoning of an unadopted panel report when it considers relevant. More importantly, as stated in the letter with which the Appellate Body conveyed in the February of 1996 its Working Procedures for Appellate Review to the DSB for information, “… it is also important to ensure consistency and coherence in our decision-making, which is to the advantage of every WTO Member and the overall multilateral trading system we all share”.
There is no doubt that, in line with the pragmatic evolution of the GATT dispute settlement system, the progressive clarification of a number of issues that are not precisely regulated in the DSU and the further development of the WTO dispute settlement procedures, will gradually evolve after having been tested and progressively clarified and improved in concrete dispute settlement cases.
Considering all of this, the author complete this book with serious-minded exploring examination and great diligence, bearing in mind that it is therefore practical and of great significance for WTO Members to be informed of the valuable rulings in those reports issued by panels and the Appellate Body in particular cases.

List of Abbreviations

ATC Agreement on Textile and Clothing
BISD Basic Instruments and Selected Documents (published by GATT)
DSU Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing
the Settlement of Disputes
DSB Dispute Settlement Body
EC The European Communities
GATS General Agreement on Trade in Services
GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
IMF International Monetary Fund
PGE Permanent Group of Experts (in the SCM Agreement)
SCM Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
SG Agreement on Safeguards
SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
TBT Technical Barriers to Trade
TMB Textiles Monitoring Body
TRIMS Trade-related Investment Measures
TRIPS Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
TSB Textiles Surveillance Body
WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization
WTO World Trade Organization
Table of Contents

Chapter I Trend towards “Judicialization”:
A Rule-oriented Dispute Settlement System
Chapter II Causes of Action before the DSB:
Art. XXIII of the GATT 1994
Section One Right to Pursue a Proceeding under the WTO
I The Concept of Nullification or Impairment
II The Standing Issue before the DSB