法律法学专业论文外文翻译--国家环境政策法文献翻译-中英文对照论文翻译
法律方面的英语论文
法律方面的英语论文法律方面的英语论文该如何写呢？本文是小编精心整理的的法律方面的英语论文，希望能帮助到你!The theory of criminal law of shallow understanding errors1. irrtumslehreLegal irrtumslehre, namely, refers to the illegality mistake for own behavior in law, whether what crime constitutes a crime shall be punished by, or what is wrong, is to oneself the legal nature of the action of meaning or misunderstandings. Legal irrtumslehre usually includes three conditions: (1) the actor's behavior in law does t constitute a crime, the offender and constitutes a crime for which imaginary guilty, (2) the behavior in law constitutes a crime and does t constitute a crime, the offender mistaken assumptions that incent, (3) for act constitutes a crime shall be convicted and punishment in light of the existing errors, misunderstanding or punishment. Due to the legal irrtumslehre, only to the behavior of the offender is not correct understanding of the legal assessment, and for their actions in fact correct understanding of the situation is still there, so its act constitutes a crime shall be investigated for criminal responsibility is and how it is not usually occurs.（1）Imaginary innocent treatment principleThe principles for imaginary innocence, whether it involves a deliberately elements. Foreign criminal law theory basically has the following kinds:1）Should know that don't speak, just for criminal facts have understanding. Canada criminal code article 19 regulation: "the ignorance of the law excuses and crime can be ShuZui reason." Motto: "Roman law and legal disclaimer" somehow alsoexpressed a principle, namely: "in the crime as subjective FanYi established condition, not request to recognize behavior of richtswitrig".2）Should know the reason, according to two: moral responsibility theory, personality responsibility theory. Moral responsibility theory emphasizes on the rationality of free will blame illegal conduct, is considered to be objective stance.3）That said, the possible illegality of responsibility for deliberately, at least to the possibility of understanding illegality. While in China mainland, the introduction of the concept of crime has another concept -- social consciousness that harm to discuss richtswitrig already meaningless. Because the deliberate crime according to law condemn the illegality of the offender is not known, the law itself is not damaged, the law of the social consciousness is harm. Social harm consciousness is the essential contents of the crime, illegal consciousness is the legal form of social consciousness. Therefore, our country law more emphasis is on the rationality of essence, which is harmful to the society values.Just because of its social harmfulness, with a social moral evaluation colour, easier for people to grasp and observe. Therefore, the author thinks that, in general, the person need to recognize behavior may be the result of inevitable or harmful to the society, and has already know. With intentionally But in fact, the forbidden by law and mass that is harmful to the society in our country nowadays the behavior under the constitution should be consistent, in other words, know the social harmfulness also know the possibility of illegal, but know the possibility of illegal is inevitable should also realize social harmfulness, both are unified. Therefore, it is generally thoughtthat the law is no excuse, the reason of law does not exclude the misunderstanding in principle, but can be culpable for deliberately discretion.（2） Misunderstandings treatment principle. Punishment We might as well so the essence of blame for his due: the crime in the subjective should blame or blame, for the intent or negligence performance. If the offender because of misunderstanding that legal person very innocent, lack of this should blame or condemning sexual, from the fundamental measure, blame is absolutely not consider disclaimer. Especially in the modern society, the legal category SAN marino, legal entry in different fields and different levels of books, recognized, comprehend legal apparently endless and same, so the person of law and misunderstandings, not inexcusable. Now, both in theory and practice, the method not cling to forgive "seems to have in shake. Therefore, to a certain extent, can also think admits exceptions excusable is legal misunderstanding of criminal law is an important symbol of humanity. In addition, it was not in the act of which is prohibited by the laws and regulations, especially after a circumstance, should have knowledge of richtswitrig actor, constitute the understanding of deliberate point of view, with the attitude of this understanding, of course, that is not the illegality or by the simple statement actor. The author thinks that the only when the legal establishment of may, FangKeZu but intentionally.2. The fact mistakeThat mistake, is to determine its subjective behavior nature and the criminal responsibility of the relevant facts wrong understanding. From the wrong reasons and phenomenon of angles, generally known that there are several mistakes: （1） Object irrtumslehreThe object is known for errors, whether there is objectively error object. It includes actor in the implementation of the existing criminal behavior of the hazards for the object and actually does not exist, or for criminal object and actually does not exist, or infringe a criminal object and actually invaded another crime object. The object of objects is usually known errors caused by mistake, but the object of different social relationship reflects different. Evil doer of objects and actual expected in fact not only harm object does not agree, and in the nature of law is not consistent. Therefore, the object irrtumslehre may affect the form of sin, crime accomplishment, and may even attempted to influence the crime. For example, in view of the circumstances, not a thought before the enemy, and a party came to stick, afterwards just know the ox was wounded. A thought of damage is "people", and the actual wounded is "cow", do not belong to the same laws of the object. Similar situation and will generally be mistaken for drug trafficking items, Actor will stolen items in the theft of guns in stealing together. This object from the subjective errors, see, is a kind of mistake, From the objective, because the mistake crime to no avail, where the criminal attempted belongs.1）Object mistakeObjects can be generalized mistake, including object mistake to belong to the object know mistake is inevitable object irrtumslehre. These include, is known to be wrong object of legal property of the same object mistake and legal properties of different objects, namely the object irrtumslehre irrtumslehre. In order to distinguish with the object mistake here, the cognition to the same object only mean error between the different objects, namely the misunderstanding of the evil doer expected objectsand actual harm to the object, but not in fact in the legal nature of the same situation. This object mistake again say things on purpose mistake not criminal responsibility. As a reserve, killing b shall be killed as b and c, do not affect a rap. This is the need to consider that a kill b behavior "mistake" cause others (c), belong to an intentional crime (b) "death", for the excess result, according to the results, which determine the ordinary mail of death was deliberately recognized for deliberately, to the death of the fault is propylene, identified as negligence, according to the intention or negligence of the general mark recognized FanYi or state of mind, not applicable rules of the mistake.2） Behavior irrtumslehreBehavior mainly includes two kind of mistake: first, the behavior nature irrtumslehre. That actor has to its social harm nature, such as understanding not imaginary defense. Behavior nature mistake might affect the form of sin, and may also affect crime. Second, the behavior tools (methods) irrtumslehre. That person to use when the conduct of tool (methods), which affects not correct understanding of harm results, behavior tools (methods) mistake can affect crime or attempted was founded, also can affect crime or belongs to the incident, a typical for murder on hazardous substances, because the drug failure and failed to kill people, can think method or tools for error doer of consciousness beyond reason not to succeed. And as actor see armour, second coming together, hence shot to play, but can't hit by the party and. Look, this is from the phenomenon of an object, or the final results for the mistake, but this error is based on the fact that the wrong doer identify offender is carefully identify to begin, can think recognize is accurate, errors in ChaWu itself. The solution to this situation, "said", its legal with qualitative andrecognize wrong object is consistent, namely directly recognized as an intentional homicide accomplishment. The death of a person is directly intentionally to b, death is the indirect intentional, just for a to b is attempted, accomplished. Additionally, if in daily life because misidentification object and damage of consequences, the crime itself is not just any criminal negligence because of problems.3)Causality irrtumslehreCausality mistake, is on his behavior and harmful results of actual connection between errors. Generally include: first, not some harm result, as has happened actor. This generally constitute a crime. Second, has certain harm result, but not for actor or for his behavior is caused, and does not affect crime accomplishment. Third, really happened, the offender is aware of its behavior, but with the actual development between the harm to the process or a mistake, general to punish crime accomplishment. In theory, the offender is not only a crime, but continuous movement, this several continuous action is not a few crime, but a crime. In this sense, doesn't exist on the results of the sack.3.Legal irrtumslehre and facts mistake and proceduresscholars in fact know mistakes and errors between the issue legal representative views mainly include:（1）For own behavior whether in law constitutes a crime, criminal or what kind of criminal punishment shall be under the incorrect understanding is legal irrtumslehre for his behavior on the implementation of the incorrect understanding is the fact that mistake,（2）The objectivity of crime is a false understanding of crime, that mistake of objective facts have clear understanding,only to act in the evaluation of existing laws on the concept of law is not correct mistakes。
法学专业课程中英文对照
法学专业课程中英文对照法学专业课程中英文对照课程名称英文课程名称大学英语(1)College English(1)大学英语(2)College English(2)大学英语(口语)College English(Oral)经济管理Economics and Management文科高等数学Mathematical Analysis for Arts大学计算机基础University Computer Foundation航空航天概论B The Introduction to Aeronautics B工程认识Engineering Experience and Cognition法理学Jurisprudence中国法制史Chinese Legal History宪法Constitutional Law行政法与行政诉讼法Administrative Law and Administrative Procedure Law刑法总论General Theory of Criminal Law刑法分论Specific Theory of Criminal Law刑事诉讼法Criminal Procedure Law民事诉讼法Civil Procedure Law民法总论General Principles of Civil Law物权法Property Law债法(含合同法)Law of Obligations(Contract Law Included)商法(含公司法和证券法)Commercial Law(Company Law and Securities Law Included)知识产权法Intellectual Property Law经济法概论Introduction to Economic Law环境与资源保护法Environment and Resources Protection Law 国际公法(含外层空间法)Public International Law(Other SpaceLawIncluded)国际私法Private International Law国际经济法International Economic Law立法学Science of Legislation现代西方法理学Modern Western Jurisprudence法律社会学Legal Sociology法律逻辑学Legal Logic外国法制史History of Foreign Legal Systems中国传统法律文化Chinese Traditional Legal Culture 人权法Human Rights Law犯罪学Criminology证据法学Evidence Law律师与公证法学Lawyer and Notarization Law仲裁法Arbitration Law法律文书Legal Writing法律职业伦理Legal Ethics债权法T ort Law亲属继承法Family and Succession Law信托法Trust Law票据法Negotiable Instruments Law破产法Bankruptcy Law保险法Insurance Law科技法Science and Technology Law网络法Network Law电子商务法Electronic Commercial Law金融法Financial Law竞争法Competition Law财税法Financial and Tax Law房地产法Real Estate Law劳动与社会保障法Labor Law and Social Security Law航空法Aviation LawWTO规则与反倾销法WTO Rules and Anti-dumping Law海商法Maritime Law欧盟法European Community Law国际商法International Business Law专业实习ⅢProfessional PracticeⅢ模拟法庭Moot Court法律诊所Legal Clinic法国名著导读(含读书方法)Guidance of the Legal Classics’Reading(Reading Methods Included)文献检索与论文写作Legal Research and Writing学术交流Academic Exchanges案例分析Case Analysis法律英语Legal English毕业设计Graduation Project。
法律专业毕业论文范文毕业论文英文翻译专业范文
法律专业毕业论文范文毕业论文英文翻译专业范文商务英语翻译教学应注重拓展学生的商务专业知识，加深学生对不同商务体裁语篇的理解和感知。
下文是WTT为大家整理的关于毕业论文英文翻译的范文，欢迎大家阅读参考!毕业论文英文翻译篇1跨文化现象在商务英语翻译教学中的影响[摘要] 跨文化现象是社会交往的产物，在商务英语翻译的社会行为中，必然会受到跨文化现象的影响。
商务英语作为专业英语，自身具有专业性、客观性与时效性的特点，因此在进行商务英语翻译教学的时候，就必须根据商务英语的特点，注意跨文化现象在源语言和目的语言之间的作用，使翻译能达到“信、达、雅”的要求。
[关键词] 跨文化现象;商务英语翻译;教学对于语言学习者而言，语言的学习和文化的融合是一个统一的过程。
在语言学习的过程中，学习者不断地接受外来的文化，并与自身的文化不断碰撞，产生新的文化认识。
因此，没有脱离文化的语言学习，也没有离开语言工具的文化交流。
另一方面，商务英语以其自身的专业特点，形成特定的翻译方法，在教学过程当中，商务英语翻译和其他英语翻译的教学有着很大的区别。
作为商务英语的教学人员，要处理好翻译过程中跨文化现象所带来的问题，商务英语的特点和跨文化现象共同构成了处理好商务英语翻译教学的关键点。
一、跨文化现象的客观存在语言是文化的载体，语言担负起了文化传承的重任。
作为语言学习者，忽略文化学习语言，是不可能真正地把语言学好，学透。
胡文仲在《跨文化交际学概论》中提到：“只注意语言的形式，而不注意语言的内涵是学不好外语的”。
跨文化是社会交往的产物。
跨文化交往包括了跨种族、跨国家、跨民族、跨地区的交往，甚至人与人之间的交往本身都是两种不同的个人文化之间相互影响、相互融合的过程。
只要个体与个体之间进行交往，就会出现跨文化现象。
因此，我们必须有跨文化交往的自觉性。
在多元文化的影响下，无论从事任何行业，都会面对多元文化所带来的冲击。
而语言学习者可以说是首当其冲。
翻译作为语言学习的重要方面，自然要通过语言的形式，看到语言的内涵。
法律行业的英语作文带翻译
For example, instead of saying "the party of the first part" and "the party of the second part," a legal writer might use "the seller" and "the buyer" to make the document more accessible to a non-legal audience.
[Client's Name]
[Client's Address]
[City, State, Zip Code]
Dear [Client's Name],
Re: [Legal Issue]
I am writing to provide you with my legal opinion regarding [describe the issue]. After carefully reviewing the relevant statutes and case law, it is my opinion that [state your conclusion and the reasons for it].
Title: English Writing in the Legal Industry 法律行业的英语作文带翻译
In the legal industry, the ability to write effectively in English is essential for communicating with clients, drafting legal documents, and presenting arguments in court. Whether you are a lawyer, a paralegal, or a legal secretary, strong English writing skills are a must.
法学专业外文翻译--国家环境政策法
中文2040字法学外文文献翻译题目: 对重大环境污染事故罪的立法思考姓名:学院（部）:专业: 法学班级: 法学外文文献翻译国家环境政策法库巴塞克，西尔弗曼环境法（第四版），清华大学出版社，2003国家环境政策法国家环境政策法（NEPA）于1970年1月1日签署生效，而且将被定性为一个规划章程。
它包括了以下三个方面的内容：1、建立了监管环境政策的环境质量委员会（CEQ）2、这之前，因为考虑到当他们做出某些决定，会对环境造成一定的影响，而这种影响也很少为某些机构制定相关政策来扶持，所以NEPA不能要求联邦机构采取造成相应环境后果的措施政策3、要求环境影响报告书（EIS）准备的每一个主要立法建议或其他联邦机构的行动，都产生于能产生重大影响质量的人文环境环境质量委员会（CEQ）NEPA的第一项任务是解决最有争议的问题：建立环境质量委员会（CEQ）。
CEQ由三人组成，其中一人被指定主持会议。
CEQ的作用是咨询，主要是提供总统关于环境问题的相关咨询。
CEQ负责收集和分析数据，通知总统有关国家正在进行的环境清理的进展情况，并对需要注意和解决的问题通过立法的方式固定下来。
每年CEQ使用其收集的数据向公众发布总统的年度环境质量报告。
CEQ也有助于联邦机构根据NEPA的要求，通过审查这些报表的草案，制定相应的程序以满足其EIS的要求。
环境质量报告书（EIS）远比设立CEQ更具有争议性的是环境影响报告书（EIS）的要求。
这个要求对一些政府机构具有广泛的影响，同时，对于私营公司而言，也影响到其通过与政府机构间的合同和政府机构出具的许可证去寻求做生意的途径。
尽管这一进程被许多受到影响的群体批评，大多数研究环境保护的效力已经结束，但它依然迫使政府在更多的机构中设置环境保护相关的工作以及制定更为细致的环境保护规划。
从谁必须提交EIS，何时提交，一份声明中必须包含何种纠纷的解决方式，以及环境影响的测评进程等是否有效等等若干个重大问题的分析中，都充分贯彻了EIS的要求。
法学专业外文翻译
法学专业外文翻译题目论环境犯罪的立法完善专业法学系别历史文化与法学系A Graduated Punishment Approach toEnvironmental CrimesSusan F. Mandiberg and Michael FaureI. INTRODUCTIONWhy do we have environmental crimes? What social harms are we addressing, and what interests are we vindicating through use of the criminal sanction? The answer to these questions is not found in traditional criminal law principles. This is because environmental interests and values do not enjoy an absolute protection in the law. Unlike theft or homicide, for example, which may cause personal benefits only to the criminal, most polluting activities generate substantial societal benefits as well as environmental costs. Thus, environmental law in many countries is aimed largely at an administrative control of pollution, usually through licensing and permitting systems. Environmental criminal statutes largely function to help ensure that control.The interweaving of administrative and criminal law has been pronounced from the beginning of modern environmental crimes in the mid-twentieth century. Then, as now, environmental criminal law focused onpunishing the lack of a permit or the violation of permit or other regulatory requirements and conditions. However, although this administrative dependence of environmental criminal law may have been the general starting point, European commentators have increasingly pointed to serious weaknesses in this approach. For one thing, if the role of the criminal law is restricted to punishing administrative disobedience, other types of pollution may go unpunished, thus limiting the ability of the criminal law to protect ecological values. In addition, unlike the situation with traditional crimes, administrators (not legislators) decide what is and is not criminal. This critique of the absolute administrative dependence of environmental criminal law has had its effects on European legislation and on international conventions.5 As a result, one can now increasingly notice the use of other models of environmental crimes, models that are less dependent on administrative law.The goal of this paper is to examine and advocate for approaches to environmental crimes in addition to the punishment of disobedience to administrative rules and decisions. We acknowledge that an effective environmental criminal scheme must include administrative-disobedience crimes. For one thing, disobedience to at least some administrative decisions is a serious matter. For another, such offenses are easiest to prove6 and thus provide a mechanism for punishing some environmental malfeasance that cannot be otherwise addressed.7 Nevertheless, actual harm to the environment—and the threat of suchharm—is more serious than mere administrative disobedience. Whenthe government can prove that someone has both acted unlawfully and has caused or threatened such harm, an effective system should have crimes in place to address the situation. In addition, in circumstances of extreme environmental harm, it is important to include a crime that does not require the government to prove any disobedience to administrative rules and decisions. Finally, the authorized punishments for offenses on this continuum of environmental criminal statutes should be graduated according to the seriousness of the social harms at issue.II. FOUR MODELS OF CRIMINALIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTALHARM- 1 -Criminal statutes address specific social harms. The act element of a criminal statute articulates the social harm at which the crime is directed. The mental-state element articulates the attitude a defendant must have had toward the social harm in order to be criminally culpable.13 While mental state is a crucial element in determining criminal liability, the analysis in this article focuses exclusively on the act element of environmental crimes.Focusing on the act element in a 1995 article, Michael Faure and Marjolein Visser proposed and examined four models of environmental crimes. First is Abstract Endangerment, a model criminalizing disobedience to administrative rules and requirements perse . Second isConcrete Endangerment Crimes with Administrative Predicates (“Concrete Endangerment”).Concrete Endangerment crimes involve behavior that both violates regulatory law and poses a threat of harm to the environment; thus, on the surface, at least, these crimes target two social harms. Crimes in the third model, Serious Environmental Pollution, punish very serious environmental harm even if the activity at issue was not otherwise unlawful; these appear to be aimed at preventing or punishing only harm to the environment itself. The fourth model, Vague Statutes, covers statutes that establish a general duty of care. The present analysis explores the first three of these models in more detail, but it also expands upon the framework. This is because, upon further consideration, we are convinced that it is useful to add an additional model for crimes that involve both an administrative predicate and actual environmental harm. We label this model Concrete Harm and refer to it as Model IV. We do not address the Vague Statutes Model.A. Model I: Abstract EndangermentOffenses following the Abstract Endangerment Model do not punish environmental pollution. Instead, their role is to enforce prior administrative decisions, and so they punish the failure of a regulated entity to adhere to administrative dictates concerning environmental regulations. In essence, the Abstract Endangerment Model merely adds criminal law to the enforcement mechanisms available to ensure compliance with monitoring, paperwork, licensing, and other rules meantto regulate pollution producing activities. The criminal provision normally contains a general statement that anyone who violates the provisions of the act or of the regulations, licenses, or permits issued to implement it will be punished with a specific sanction. Included in this group are statutes that make it a crime to engage in specified activities without a required license or operating permit. The criminal law typically applies in these kinds of cases as soon as the administrative provision has been violated, even if no actual harm or threat of harm to the environment occurs.If the criminal provision requires or presumes environmental harm or the threat of such harm, the statute is not of the Abstract Endangerment variety.Although Abstract Endangerment crimes focus on vindicating administrative values, punishing the administrative violation indirectly furthers ecological values in two ways. First, an entity that follows administrative rules is less likely to harm the environment. More to the point, if administrative rules are followed, the regulatory agency can monitor the entity’s operations to ensure that harm is less likely to occur.Nevertheless, although environmental values are implicated byAbstract Endangerment crimes, the overlap with such values is incomplete. For one thing, an entity in compliance with all administrative rules can still cause environmental “harm.” Consider that, for each parameter—air, water, soil— the administrative agency will set a baseline of “acceptable”contact between a pollutant and the environment. This baseline will reflect a compromise among such considerations as the pollutant’seffect on the environment, society’s need for the polluting activity, and the existence (and cost) of technology that can mitigate the damage. Thus, compliance with the baseline does not mean a lack of environmental “harm.” However,the disconnect between administrative and environmental values cango the other way as well. That is, an entity that violatesadministrative rules may not be causing environmental harm. Take, for example, an entity that transports hazardous waste without the required paperwork.- 2 -This violation harms administrative norms first and foremost. But there is no emission, and thus no environmental harm: as regards environmental values, the crime is inchoate. Regardless of which aspect of the disconnect one views, the failure of Abstract Endangerment crimes to focus on an activity’s impact on the environment makes this model less thancompletely effective in protecting ecological values.B. Model II: Concrete Endangerment Crimes with Administrative PredicatesThe second model is that of Concrete Endangerment Crimes with Administrative Predicates (“Concrete Endangerment”). As with the first model, the activity in question must take place in an unlawful way by engaging in the activity without a required permit or otherauthorization or by violating conditions in a statute, regulation, or permit.51 However, the characteristic of unlawfulness may be integratedin different ways. Some of the crimes in this model include as an element the fact of violating regulatory law. Others provide the defense that the activity was authorized.53 Even though the legal technique is different, the unlawfulness of the discharge remains a factor in criminality.C. Model III: Concrete Harm Crimes with Administrative PredicatesThe third model is Concrete Harm Crimes with AdministrativePredicates (“Concrete Harm”). As noted above, this model has b een added to Faure’s and Visser’s original approach. Statutes fitting this model are similar to Concrete Endangerment crimes in that they require proof that the actor violated an administrative rule. However, these crimes go beyond threats and require proof of actual environmental harm.The identification of crimes fitting Model III can be tricky, as it depends upon the definition of “environmental harm.” As we will showin Part 1 of this section, some statutory definitions focus on the environment directly, but others adopt an anthropocentric definition of “environmental harm.” These latter seem based on the premise that emissions or releases that threaten or harm human health, safety, orother interests must of necessity also harm the environment. To the extent that this interpretation is accurate, the “knowing endangerment” provisions of the CWA and RCRA are examples of Model III crimes. Inaddition, Europe provides a number of examples of Concrete Harm crimes.Because we are working toward a graduated punishment approach to environmental crimes, it makes sense to us to differentiate Concrete Harm statutes from the crimes in Model II. Concrete Harm crimes require proof of actual harm, and so it is logical for such statutes to impose higher penalties than those requiring merely a threat of harm. When the government can prove both an administrative violation and actual environmental harm, the authorization and imposition of increased punishment would be expected to further the vindication of environmental values through increased deterrence and retribution.105 However, Concrete Harm statutes run into conceptual and proof problems that can frustrate these goals. For one thing, the concept of environmental “harm” is difficult to define. A second problem invol ves causation. We will explore these in turn.1. Defining Environmental “Harm”A traditional way of measuring environmental harm is to look through the lens of harm to human beings instead of focusing on the environment itself. One variation focuses on threats to human health or safety. A second variation is to focus on harm to private property. A final way tolook through the lens of harm to human beings is to measure financial costs other than damage to property itself. At first, it may not be clear that statutes such as these vindicate environmental values at all. After all, the threat or existence of environmental harm is not an element of the crime—these results are not even mentioned. And yet, these statutes are part of environmental protection schemes. Their placement within such schemes leads to the conclusion that harm to humans is used as a surrogate measure for harm to the environment: if the pollution is extreme enough to threaten human interests, the environment must of necessity also be threatened.There are drawbacks to this surrogate approach. One obvious problem is that environmental damage might occur far from populated areas and thus remain outside the- 3 -scope of statutes that define harm in human terms. However, there is another, more serious drawback. Consider, for instance, the act of draining a wetland and filling it with soil or rocks. Elimination of wetlands may endanger human health and safety in the long term, for example by changing hydrological patterns, contributing to flooding, and so forth. However, eliminating a wetland does not present the type of short-term danger that occurs, say, in a Bhopal-type situation where toxic chemicals are emitted into the ambient air. If harm to human health, safety, and property is viewed only in the short term, the actor who fills the wetland cannot be prosecuted for a Concrete Harm orSerious Environmental Harm crime; even a Concrete Endangerment crime is off limits if the threat is viewed in the short term. But this result seems wrong. Environmental harm has, in fact, occurred, as eliminating the wetland certainly has dire short-term consequences for the flora and fauna in the ecosystem. If we are to use the criminal sanction to address this situation through anything other than Abstract Endangerment crimes, we will have to articulate what we mean by harm to the environment without using human values as a surrogate.A legislature that wants to address a full spectrum of environmental harm must articulate a standard that reflects purely environmental values. The statute must require proof of something more than mere contact between a pollutant and the environment; otherwise, it would be functionally no different from the “presumed harm” variety of the ConcreteEndangerment Model. But what’s more? And how can a legislature define what may beineffable without violating the principle of legality?Examples do exist of criminal statutes that attempt to go beyond an anthropocentric focus. Some speak in terms of environmental “harm” or “damage” or authorize differences insanctions based on degrees of “harm.”Others require proof of “pollution.” Still others punish negative changes to the existing environment. While such provisions are laudable for their focus on environmental values, they leave it to either thefact finder or appellate case law to make the notion of harm (or “damage,” “suitability,” “detriment,” or even “pollution”) more concrete. The same problem may exist even in provisions that appear at first glance to be quite clear. One German statute, for instance, punishes any actor in a protected natural area who unlawfully “mines or extracts mineral resources or other soil components; makes excavations or heaps, creates, alters or removes bodies of water; drains moors, swamps, marshes or other wetlands; clears a forest; [or] damages or removes plants of a specially protected species….”; however this provision adds that the activity must “thereby interfere not insubstantially” with the interest in question,making the definition less useful than it might have been.Open-ended definitions of environmental harm may be attractive to legislators, but they also create problems. One problem arises if the statute allows the fact finder to equate “harm” with any negative change in the quality of water, air, or soil no matter how minor. This is because any contact between a pollutant and the environment is likely to cause some minor negative change in the latter. Such aninterpretation of “harm” conflates Model II, involving a threat of “harm”and Model III, which requires actual “harm.” A coherent environmental criminal scheme should guide fact finders in distinguishing between these degrees of seriousness.2. The Issue of CausationConcrete harm crimes require the prosecution to prove that the defendant’s behaviorcaused environmental harm, however that is defined. Serious Environmental Harm crimes—some of those in Model IV, to be discussed below—carry the same requirement.Proving causation is not particularly difficult in the case of a single polluting event that results in clear damage. However, the requirement could present a challenge to prosecutors in other situations, reducing the number of cases in which these result-defined crimes are useful as tools of environmental protection.Causation problems are likely to be common in prosecutions requiring proof of actual harm. This is because in many situations a defendant may be able to show that one or more- 4 -additional actors independently emitted pollutants into the same water, soil, or air, either previously, simultaneously, or subsequently to the defendant’s own actions. Of course, similarcausation problems also arise in the context of traditional crimes with result elements, most notably in the prosecution of homicides. This being so, any jurisdiction with a developed criminal law will have worked out solutions to at least the most common of these problems, and there is likely to be informative scholarly material on any issues still outstanding. The main challenge for pollution crimes is to translate theexisting solutions from the vocabulary of homicide (or assault, or other more traditional result-defined crimes) to that of environmental harm.It is valid to ask whether there is really a need to undertake the task of developing a body of causation law in the context of environmental crimes. Why not be content to use Abstract and Concrete Endangerment crimes, which do not require proof that the defendant caused a concrete result? The answer is related to our suggestion of a graduated punishment approach, discussed in Section III. Under such an approach, Concrete Harm crimes would be punished more severely than Abstract or Concrete Endangerment crimes (and Serious Environmental Harm crimes might carry even more severe punishment). Where proof of causation is difficult or impossible, conviction for the lower offense would have to suffice. In cases in which such proof could be made out, however, the more serious crime more accurately reflects the defendant’s behavior. Any scheme tha t lacks offenses requiring actual harm conflates the seriousness of different degrees of criminality.This section has addressed a model in which the government mustprove both an administrative violation and actual harm to the environment. While there are challenges involved in proving harm and causation, more severe punishment might accompany convictions in which these challenges have been met. But what if the government can prove both harm and causation but no administrative violation? Should compliance with administrative requirements shield polluters from theworst types of environmental damage? The next section addresses that issue.D. Model IV: Serious Environmental Pollution: Eliminating the Administrative LinkThis model, which we will call “Serious Environmental Pollution”for ease of reference, aims to punish very serious pollution regardless of whether there is any underlying regulatory violation. In fact, statutes following this model impose criminal sanctions despite the defendant having obeyed license or permit conditions or other regulatory laws. To put it differently, in this model following the conditions of a license cannot constitute a defense: the “permit shield” does not apply. Thus, this model differs from Model III.The administrative link is broken for a reason: crimes followingthis model are based on the assumption that the environmental harm at issue is of a magnitude beyond that contemplated by the administrative rules with which the entity complied. Crimes following this model are relatively rare. However, as the examples to come show, they do exist. The existing crimes vary in the way they eliminate the link to administrative rules. Some eliminate the “permit shield.” Others eliminate the “unlawfulness” element from the crime’s definition. A third variation is the use of traditional crimes, as opposed to specifically environmental criminal provisions. The remainder of this section will describe those variations, followed by a general discussion of implications accompanying these distinctions.FROM:Susan F. Mandiberg,Michael Faure.A Graduated Punishment Approach to Environmental Crimes[J].Columbia Journal of Environmental Law,Vol.34,2009.- 5 -环境犯罪的分级惩罚模型构想[美]苏珊?曼迪伯格 [比利时]迈克?福尔一、导语我们为什么要规范环境犯罪? 制裁犯罪时，我们应对的是哪些社会危害，又在维护什么利益? 在传统刑法中这些问题是无法找到答案的。
法学英文毕业论文
法学英文毕业论文AbstractWith the progress of society and the development of economy, the legal system is constantly improving. Law is a very important subject and is widely studied by people in many fields. This paper is aimed at analyzing the causes of wrongful convictions, and discusses the significance of avoiding wrongful convictions. Besides, several suggestions are put forward to reduce the occurrence of wrongful convictions.Key words: wrongful convictions; causes; avoiding; suggestionsIntroductionWrongful conviction is a very serious issue and has become a global problem. It refers to the situation that a person is sentenced to imprisonment or even sentenced to death penalty wrongly. Wrongful conviction is a violation of human rights, it undermines the legitimacy of the legal system and the authority of the judiciary, and it may also cause huge impact on the individuals and their families. Therefore, it is the common responsibility of the society to investigate the causes of wrongful convictions,avoid them, and protect the rights of the accused persons.Causes of wrongful convictionsMistaken eyewitness testimonyEyewitness testimony is regarded as an important piece of evidence in many cases, but it is also subject to many limitations, such as the influence of emotions, memory distortions, and poor lighting conditions, which may lead to wrong identification. In the case of Texas v. Cole (2011), a bank robber was wrongfully convicted due to the mistaken identification by witnesses, and he was subsequently exonerated after a DNA test. Therefore, to avoid wrongful convictions caused by mistaken eyewitness testimony, the importance of eyewitness testimony should be reevaluated and precautionary measures should be taken to ensure the credibility of the testimony.False confessionsFalse confession is another significant cause of wrongful convictions. People may be coerced to confess crimes they did not commit, especially when they are under mental or physical pressure, such as threats, torture, or prolonged interrogation. For instance, In the case of Ryan Ferguson (2013), he was wrongfullyconvicted and spent almost 10 years in prison due to the false confession by another witness. Therefore, to avoid wrongful convictions caused by false confessions, legal procedures for interrogations should be regulated, the right to remain silent should be emphasized, and the confession evidence should be treated with caution.Ineffective legal representationIneffective legal representation is also a significant cause of wrongful conviction. It refers to situations where the legal representation is not competent or does not provide the necessary resources, including lack of investigation and failure to call expert witnesses. In the case of Sean Hodgson (2012), he was wrongfully convicted for 27 years, and the delay in his release was mainly due to the inadequate representation of his case. Hence, to avoid wrongful convictions caused by ineffective legal representation, the legal system should guarantee a competent and effective defense counsel for the accused, and adequate resources should be allocated to support them.Suggestions to avoid wrongful convictionsStrengthen the forensic evidenceForensic evidence, including DNA testing, fingerprint analysis, and ballistics analysis, is a reliable and unbiasedsource of evidence, which can effectively identify the perpetrators and reduce the risk of wrongful convictions. Therefore, more resources should be invested in forensic technology, and forensic evidence should be used more widely in trials.Improve the legal systemThe legal system should guarantee the rights of the accused, including the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence and the right to review. The judicial system should also establish the innocent project to review and investigate wrongful convictions, to help exonerate those who have been wrongfully convicted.ConclusionIn conclusion, wrongful conviction is a major problem and has serious consequences. It is necessary to analyze the causes of wrongful convictions and adopt effective measures to avoid them. Strengthening forensic evidence and improving the legal system is of great significance in reducing the probability of wrongful conviction. Only by establishing a fair and just legal system can we protect the rights of the accused and maintain the legitimacy of the judiciary.。
中国环境法制建设对环保投资和环保产业的影响中英文对照
中国环境法制建设对环保投资和环保产业的影响中英文对照Influence of environmental legal system construction in China for investment in environmental protection and environmental protection industry in Chinese and English.内容提要: 本文回顾了我国30年来环境与资源法制建设的历程，从通过法律确立市场信心和直接引导资金进入环保领域等两个方面分析了环境与资源法制建设对环保投资和环保产业发展的影响，并指出了当前我国环境与资源保护法律在引导环保投资、促进环保产业发展方面的不足及其根源。
在此基础上，从立法目标、立法框架、法律制度和法律实施机制等四个方面提出了今后我国环保立法的目标与方向。
Abstract: This paper reviews the history of legal system construction of China's environment and resources for 30 years, from the establishment of market confidence through legal and direct funds to enter the field of environmental protection, two aspects of the effect of legal system construction of environment and resources to environmental protection investment and the development of environmental protection industry, and points out that the current China's environment and resources protection law under the guidance of environmental protection investment, promote the development of environmental protection industry and its deficiency causes. On this basis, puts forward the goal and direction of China's environmental protection legislation in the future from the four aspects of the legislative goal, the legislative framework, legal system and law enforcement mechanism.从各国环境保护的实际历程来看，同一般的社会投资和产业发展不同，环保投资和环保产业是随环境与资源保护法律及相关政策措施的制定和实施所“引导”或者“转化”出来的。
法学专业外文翻译
附录一(外文原文)BOOK II mean to inquire if, in the civil order, there can be any sure and legitimate rule of administration, men being taken as they are and laws as they might be. In this inquiry I shall end always to unite what right sanctions with what is prescribed by interest, in order that justice and utility may in no case be divided.I enter upon my task without proving the importance of the subject. I shall be asked if I am a prince or a legislator, to write on politics. I answer that I am neither, and that is why I do so. If I were a prince or a legislator, I should not waste time in saying what wants doing; I should do it, or hold my peace.As I was born a citizen of a free State, and a member of the Sovereign, I feel that, however feeble the influence my voice can have on public affairs, the right of voting on them makes it my duty to study them: and I am happy, when I reflect upon governments, to find my inquiries always furnish me with new reasons for loving that of my own country.1. SUBJECT OF THE FIRST BOOKMan is born free; and everywhere he is in chains. One thinks himself the master of others, and still remains a greater slave than they. How did this change come about? I do not know. What can make it legitimate? That question I think I can answer.If I took into account only force, and the effects derived from it, I should say: "As long as a people is compelled to obey, and obeys, it does well; as soon as it can shake off theyoke, and shakes it off, it does still better; for, regaining its liberty by the same right as took it away, either it is justified in resuming it, or there was no justification for those who took it away." But the social order is a sacred right which is the basis of all other rights. Nevertheless, this right does not come from nature, and must therefore be founded on conventions. Before coming to that, I have to prove what I have just asserted.2. THE FIRST SOCIETIESThe most ancient of all societies, and the only one that is natural, is the family: and even so the children remain attached to the father only so long as they need him for their preservation. As soon as this need ceases, the natural bond is dissolved. The children, released from the obedience they owed to the father, and the father, released from the care he owed his children, return equally to independence. If they remain united, they continue so no longer naturally, but voluntarily; and the family itself is then maintained only by convention.This common liberty results from the nature of man. His first law is to provide for his own preservation, his first cares are those which he owes to himself; and, as soon as he reaches years of discretion, he is the sole judge of the proper means of preserving himself, and consequently becomes his own master.The family then may be called the first model of political societies: the ruler corresponds to the father, and the people to the children; and all, being born free and equal, alienate their liberty only for their own advantage. The whole difference is that,in the family, the love of the father for his children repays him for the care he takes of them, while, in the State, the pleasure of commanding takes the place of the love which the chief cannot have for the peoples under him.Grotius denies that all human power is established in favour of the governed, and quotes slavery as an example. His usual method of reasoning is constantly to establish right by fact. It would be possible to employ a more logical method, but none could be more favourable to tyrants.It is then, according to Grotius, doubtful whether the human race belongs to a hundred men, or that hundred men to the human race: and, throughout his book, he seems to incline to the former alternative, which is also the view of Hobbes. On this showing, the human species is divided into so many herds of cattle, each with its ruler, who keeps guard over them for the purpose of devouring them.As a shepherd is of a nature superior to that of his flock, the shepherds of men, i.e., their rulers, are of a nature superior to that of the peoples under them. Thus, Philo tells us, the Emperor Caligula reasoned, concluding equally well either that kings were gods, or that men were beasts.The reasoning of Caligula agrees with that of Hobbes and Grotius. Aristotle, before any of them, had said that men are by no means equal naturally, but that some are born for slavery, and others for dominion.Aristotle was right; but he took the effect for the cause. Nothing can be more certain than that every man born in slavery is born for slavery. Slaves lose everything in theirchains, even the desire of escaping from them: they love their servitude, as the comrades of Ulysses loved their brutish condition. If then there are slaves by nature, it is because there have been slaves against nature. Force made the first slaves, and their cowardice perpetuated the condition.I have said nothing of King Adam, or Emperor Noah, father of the three great monarchs who shared out the universe, like the children of Saturn, whom some scholars have recognised in them. I trust to getting due thanks for my moderation; for, being a direct descendant of one of these princes, perhaps of the eldest branch, how do I know that a verification of titles might not leave me the legitimate king of the human race? In any case, there can be no doubt that Adam was sovereign of the world, as Robinson Crusoe was of his island, as long as he was its only inhabitant; and this empire had the advantage that the monarch, safe on his throne, had no rebellions, wars, or conspirators to fear.3. THE RIGHT OF THE STRONGESTThe strongest is never strong enough to be always the master, unless he transforms strength into right, and obedience into duty. Hence the right of the strongest, which, though to all seeming meant ironically, is really laid down as a fundamental principle. But are we never to have an explanation of this phrase? Force is a physical power, and I fail to see what moral effect it can have. To yield to force is an act of necessity, not of will -- at the most, an act of prudence. In what sense can it be a duty?Suppose for a moment that this so-called "right" exists. I maintain that the sole result isa mass of inexplicable nonsense. For, if force creates right, the effect changes with the cause: every force that is greater than the first succeeds to its right. As soon as it is possible to disobey with impunity, disobedience is legitimate; and, the strongest being always in the right, the only thing that matters is to act so as to become the strongest. But what kind of right is that which perishes when force fails? If we must obey perforce, there is no need to obey because we ought; and if we are not forced to obey, we are under no obligation to do so. Clearly, the word "right" adds nothing to force: in this connection, it means absolutely nothing.Obey the powers that be. If this means yield to force, it is a good precept, but superfluous: I can answer for its never being violated. All power comes from God, I admit; but so does all sickness: does that mean that we are forbidden to call in the doctor? A brigand surprises me at the edge of a wood: must I not merely surrender my purse on compulsion; but, even if I could withhold it, am I in conscience bound to give it up? For certainly the pistol he holds is also a power.Let us then admit that force does not create right, and that we are obliged to obey only legitimate powers. In that case, my original question recurs.4. SLA VERYSince no man has a natural authority over his fellow, and force creates no right, we must conclude that conventions form the basis of all legitimate authority among men. If an individual, says Grotius, can alienate his liberty and make himself the slave of a master, why could not a whole people do the same and make itself subject to a king?There are in this passage plenty of ambiguous words which would need explaining; but let us confine ourselves to the word alienate. To alienate is to give or to sell. Now, a man who becomes the slave of another does not give himself; he sells himself, at the least for his subsistence: but for what does a people sell itself? A king is so far from furnishing his subjects with their subsistence that he gets his own only from them; and, according to Rabelais, kings do not live on nothing. Do subjects then give their persons on condition that the king takes their goods also? I fail to see what they have left to preserve.It will be said that the despot assures his subjects civil tranquillity.Granted; but what do they gain, if the wars his ambition brings down upon them, his insatiable avidity, and the vexations conduct of his ministers press harder on them than their own dissensions would have done? What do they gain, if the very tranquillity they enjoy is one of their miseries? Tranquillity is found also in dungeons; but is that enough to make them desirable places to live in? The Greeks imprisoned in the cave of the Cyclops lived there very tranquilly, while they were awaiting their turn to be devoured.To say that a man gives himself gratuitously, is to say what is absurd and inconceivable; such an act is null and illegitimate, from the mere fact that he who does it is out of his mind. To say the same of a whole people is to suppose a people of madmen; and madness creates no right.Even if each man could alienate himself, he could not alienate his children: they are born men and free; their liberty belongs to them, and no one but they has the right todispose of it. Before they come to years of discretion, the father can, in their name, lay down conditions for their preservation and well-being, but he cannot give them irrevocably and without conditions: such a gift is contrary to the ends of nature, and exceeds the rights of paternity. It would therefore be necessary, in order to legitimise an arbitrary government, that in every generation the people should be in a position to accept or reject it; but, were this so, the government would be no longer arbitrary.To renounce liberty is to renounce being a man, to surrender the rights of humanity and even its duties. For him who renounces everything no indemnity is possible. Such a renunciation is incompatible with man's nature; to remove all liberty from his will is to remove all morality from his acts. Finally, it is an empty and contradictory convention that sets up, on the one side, absolute authority, and, on the other, unlimited obedience. Is it not clear that we can be under no obligation to a person from whom we have the right to exact everything? Does not this condition alone, in the absence of equivalence or exchange, in itself involve the nullity of the act? For what right can my slave have against me, when all that he has belongs to me, and, his right being mine, this right of mine against myself is a phrase devoid of meaning?Grotius and the rest find in war another origin for the so-called right of slavery. The victor having, as they hold, the right of killing the vanquished, the latter can buy back his life at the price of his liberty; and this convention is the more legitimate because it is to the advantage of both parties.But it is clear that this supposed right to kill the conquered is by no means deduciblefrom the state of war. Men, from the mere fact that, while they are living in their primitive independence, they have no mutual relations stable enough to constitute either the state of peace or the state of war, cannot be naturally enemies. War is constituted by a relation between things, and not between persons; and, as the state of war cannot arise out of simple personal relations, but only out of real relations, private war, or war of man with man, can exist neither in the state of nature, where there is no constant property, nor in the social state, where everything is under the authority of the laws.Individual combats, duels and encounters, are acts which cannot constitute a state; while the private wars, authorised by the Establishments of Louis IX, King of France, and suspended by the Peace of God, are abuses of feudalism, in itself an absurd system if ever there was one, and contrary to the principles of natural right and to all good polity.War then is a relation, not between man and man, but between State and State, and individuals are enemies only accidentally, not as men, nor even as citizens, but as soldiers; not as members of their country, but as its defenders. Finally, each State can have for enemies only other States, and not men; for between things disparate in nature there can be no real relation.Furthermore, this principle is in conformity with the established rules of all times and the constant practice of all civilised peoples. Declarations of war are intimations less to powers than to their subjects. The foreigner, whether king, individual, or people, whorobs, kills or detains the subjects, without declaring war on the prince, is not an enemy, but a brigand. Even in real war, a just prince, while laying hands, in the enemy's country, on all that belongs to the public, respects the lives and goods of individuals: he respects rights on which his own are founded. The object of the war being the destruction of the hostile State, the other side has a right to kill its defenders, while they are bearing arms; but as soon as they lay them down and surrender, they cease to be enemies or instruments of the enemy, and become once more merely men, whose life no one has any right to take. Sometimes it is possible to kill the State without killing a single one of its members; and war gives no right which is not necessary to the gaining of its object. These principles are not those of Grotius: they are not based on the authority of poets, but derived from the nature of realityand based on reason.The right of conquest has no foundation other than the right of the strongest. If war does not give the conqueror the right to massacre the conquered peoples, the right to enslave them cannot be based upon a right which does not exist. No one has a right to kill an enemy except when he cannot make him a slave, and the right to enslave him cannot therefore be derived from the right to kill him. It is accordingly an unfair exchange to make him buy at the price of his liberty his life,over which the victor holds no right. Is it not clear that there is a vicious circle in founding the right of life and death on the right of slavery, and the right of slavery on the right of life and death?Even if we assume this terrible right to kill everybody, I maintain that a slave made in war, or a conquered people, is under no obligation to a master, except to obey him as far as he is compelled to do so. By taking an equivalent for his life, the victor has not done him a favour; instead of killing him without profit, he has killed him usefully. So far then is he from acquiring over him any authority in addition to that of force, that the state of war continues to subsist between them: their mutual relation is the effect of it, and the usage of the right of war does not imply a treaty of peace. A convention has indeed been made; but this convention, so far from destroying the state of war, presupposes its continuance.So, from whatever aspect we regard the question, the right of slavery is null and void, not only as being illegitimate, but also because it is absurd and meaningless. The words slave and right contradict each other, and are mutually exclusive. It will always be equally foolish for a man to say to a man or to a people: "I make with you a convention wholly at your expense and wholly to my advantage; I shall keep it as long as I like, and you will keep it as long as I like."5. THAT WE MUST ALWAYS GO BACK TO A FIRST CONVENTIONEven if I granted all that I have been refuting, the friends of despotism would be no better off. There will always be a great difference between subduing a multitude and ruling a society. Even if scattered individuals were successively enslaved by one man, however numerous they might be, I still see no more than a master and his slaves, and certainly not a people and its ruler; I see what may be termed an aggregation, but notan association; there is as yet neither public good nor body politic. The man in question, even if he has enslaved half the world, is still only an individual; his interest, apart from that of others, is still a purely private interest. If this same man comes to die, his empire, after him, remains scattered and without unity, as an oak falls and dissolves into a heap of ashes when the fire has consumed it.A people, says Grotius, can give itself to a king. Then, according to Grotius, a people is a people before it gives itself. The gift is itself a civil act, and implies public deliberation. It would be better, before examining the act by which a people gives itself to a king, to examine that by which it has become a people; for this act, being necessarily prior to the other, is the true foundation of society.Indeed, if there were no prior convention, where, unless the election were unanimous, would be the obligation on the minority to submit to the choice of the majority? How have a hundred men who wish for a master the right to vote on behalf of ten who do not? The law of majority voting isitself something established by convention, and presupposes unanimity, on one occasion at least.附录二(中文译文)第一卷我要探讨在社会秩序之中，从人类的实际情况与法律的可能情况着眼，能不能有某种合法的而又确切的政权规则。
法学外文翻译一教学文稿
法学外文翻译温州姜原文一：Copyright I 2004 Washington UniversityWashington University Global Studies Law Review CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR LABOR SAFETY VIOLATIONS IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINANAME: John BalzanoSUMMARY:... China’s workers have fallen on hard times. ... One scholar comments that China’s 1994 Labor Law seems to reflect warmer feelings on the part of the Chinese government with regard to civil liability in the context of labor and employment law. ... The tools that one needs to analyze how the criminal law can be used to punish labor safety violations are simply to understand the general provisions of the criminal law on dolus specialis (mens rea), the concept of criminal liability for a corporation or other legal entity, and the actus reus for the specific crimes. ... What emerges from these provisions as cited above is that when a safety accident (1) occurs, (2) results in death, injury, or severe consequences, (3) is due to violations that had already been pointed out by the authorities or the employees of the corporation, and (4) is severe, then criminal liability shall attach for those personnel who are directly (zhijie) responsible for its occurrence. ... In the end, success may depend on the theory chosen, and the willingness of the procurator and judge to allow a negligence theory in a labor safety violation case. ...KEYWORDS: criminal Liability labor safety violationsTEXT:B.IntroductionChina’s workers have fallen on hard times. In the Peoples Republic of China’s (PRC’s) new socialist market economy State-owned enterprises, which currently employ about sixty percent of the urban population, have been forced to lay off workers to compete with the emerging private sector and international conglomerates. China scholars have recently devoted much attention to the sad state of Chinese workers, telling tales of inefficient social insurance and rampant unemployment. Some scholars have found it almost impossible to count the numbers of urban unemployed in the world’s most populous nation. M oreover, to add injury to insult, there are problems inside the factory as well. The Chinese government has come under considerable pressure to deal with the growing number of industrial accidents, resulting deaths, and uncountable labor law violations that plague a nation vigorously trying to conform its laws to WTO standards within the next several years. Indeed, there is a growing realization that Chinafaces a massive challenge in bringing its labor standards up to code for the WTO, especially while trying to make an already failing State sector internationally competitive.Over the past twenty years, China has enacted a number of labor laws and regulations aimed at dealing with labor safety problems. 7 Most importantly, the PRC enacted a labor law in 1994, and since then, the provinces and other assorted jurisdictions have done a considerable amount of legislating at the local level on labor standards and safety. At that time, scholars were optimistic that this profuse labor legislation would work to fix some of the labor issues that have been piling up since the beginning of the reform era in 1978. Unfortunately, China’s workers are not much safer and happier than they were before. This continuing problem leads one to question how effective the Ministry of Labor and Social Security (MOLSS) and the Chinese courts have been at enforcing this growing body of labor and employment law. Also relevant to this discussion, is the question of how many of the labor safety violations in highly industrialized areas are actually uncovered in time to prevent accidents and save lives. The answer, unfortunately, is very few. It seems then that China’s labor law provides for an ineffective system for supervising and deterring production operations from engaging in illegal and unsafe labor practices.In light of the serious deficiencies in the current civil and administrative legal mechanisms available for the enforcement of labor safety violations, this Note will argue that the PRC should strengthen existing criminal penalties and deterrents for violating labor safety laws. More specifically, the Chinese Government must consider refining and more frequently utilizing some of the provisions in the Labor Law and the Criminal Code to bring about a more effective system of criminal enforcement of the labor law, establish more formidable deterrents for managers and workers in enterprises in both the public and private sector, and promote a safe workplace. This Note will argue that this kind of reform should include more defined mens rea requirements, criminal liability for managers in the enterprise or legal entity, and criminal liability for safety violations which create a serious risk, but have not yet caused a serious accident.B.The History of Labor Law in the PRCUntil the enactment of the 1994 Labor Law, the PRC had no comprehensive labor law other than a set of regulations, which were drafted by the then Ministry of Labor within the State Council. In fact, the growth of the concept of labor rights as codified in the 1994 law has been a long time in the making, although the celebration of the worker in Chinese society was important throughout the earlier part of the communist era. Indeed, the establishment of the Chinese Communist Party in the early 1920s century brought a worke r’s movement to life that prevailed throughout the Mao Era. This movement gathered momentum during the Cultural Revolution (1965-1969) when the workers were one of the groups, which were active in many of the new movements (yundong) that tore through Chinese society.Then, with the death of Mao Ze Dong in the late 1970s and the beginning of the reform era under Deng Xiao Ping, the place of workers in the PRC began to fall. Deng’s market reforms brought about a new private sector, which created competition for the enormous, inefficient State enterprises, and the workers were hit from two angles. First, in the private sector labor was no longer protected by the State, or at least not to the same extent that it was under Mao’s command economy. Second, due to changing economic conditions and the growth of a market economy in China, the State sector began to suffer and to lay off workers. Also, workers in the State sector were no longer protected and provided for to the same extent that they were under Mao’s “IronRice Bowl” (datiewan). The gap between the rich and the poor grew fast, and the gap between eastern and western parts of the PRC began to appear more pronounced as well. Thus, as China’s economic situation changed, the workers began to find themselves jobless and subject to new challenges in a more competitive market environment.B. Domestic Labor ReformDeng’s market reforms also brought about a great deal of legal reform. The 1980s saw a considerable amount of lawmaking, which has only increased in the 1990s. With this proliferation of legislation, governmental organs have found themselves with more of a role to play in the policy process. In terms of labor legislation, there has been participation from all levels. The National People’s Congress (NPC) e nacted the Labor Law in 1994, and since then, the Ministry of the Labor and Social Security and the local People’s Congresses have all become involved in supplementing the Labor Law by drafting administrative and procedural regulations. The result of all of this legislation is a seemingly complete system of labor law and enforcement. However, there has been less success in terms of how effective the national and local governments, and administrative agencies have been at implementing this growing body of law and regulations.C. China Joins the World: International Influence on China’s Labor Law ReformsCoupled with domestic support for legal reform is the influence of many of the international organizations that China has joined or will join. Indeed, China has become a much more proactive member of the international community since the beginning of the Deng-era in the late 1980s. Certainly, China’s impending entry into the WTO has had an extraordinary influence over the legislation promulgated in the last ten years. With regard to labor, the influence of the international community, particularly the International Labor Organization (ILO), is quite apparent in the 1994 Labor Law. However, as previously mentioned, the problem is not the amount of legislation, or, for the most part, its substantive content, but rather the effective enforcement of these new laws and regulations.II. Legal Mechanisms for Resolving Disputes and Enforcing Labor LawA. The Civil Law and Dispute ResolutionThe PRC Labor Law provides for the settlement of disputes through one of three ways: mediation, arbitration (zhongcai), and litigation (susong). The last option of litigation, however, is only available after the parties to the labor dispute have gone through the arbitration process. These methods of dispute resolution constitute a mechanism for the worker to seek redress for her grievances, such as contract disputes, through the civil law. One scholar comments that China’s 1994 Labor Law seems to reflect warmer feelings on the part of the Chinese government with regard to civil liability in the context of labor and employment law. The Labor Law does include quite a few civil remedies for workers seeking relief for various problems relating to wages and breach of contract. In actuality, however, little relief has been afforded to workers, who decide to use the civil law to solve their problems. Instead, a worker who sues may not only lose the suit, but may also lose her job or face retribution from her employer.B. Criminal PenaltiesThere are also remedies available under the criminal law for certain more serious violationsof the Labor Law and relevant regulations. Regardless of the provisions of the Labor Law that mention criminal liability, any criminal liability relating to the workplace or the worker is liability completely under the PRC Criminal Law and its provisions. In other words, the Labor Law does not itself criminalize behavior, the criminal law does.There are several provisions in the Criminal Law, which correspond or match directly with similar provisions in the chapter entitled “Legal Liability”in the Labor Law. Indeed, criminal liability may be imposed in the following areas: safety protection, prohibition of child labor, protection of the personal and democratic rights of the laborers (forced labor), and maintaining an adequate inspection system. There is one final requirement for intersections between the Labor Law and the Criminal Law to arise: the circumstances must be especially severe (qingjie yanzhong).The tools that one needs to analyze how the criminal law can be used to punish labor safety violations are simply to understand the general provisions of the criminal law on dolus specialis (mens rea), the concept of criminal liability for a corporation or other legal entity, and the actus reus for the specific crimes. Beginning with the actus reus of labor-related crimes, Articles 134-137 cover labor related accidents under the heading of “Crimes that Infringe on the Public Safety.” The mens rea for most of these crimes is assumedly negligence, and the accident caused must be “severe” (zhongda.) While the personnel directly responsible for the actus reus may be punished with either imprisonment or a fine.What emerges from these provisions as cited above is that when a safety accident (1) occurs, (2) results in death, injury, or severe consequences, (3) is due to violations that had already been pointed out by the authorities or the employees of the corporation, and (4) is severe, then criminal liability shall attach for those personnel who are directly (zhijie) responsible for its occurrence. The provisions do not specifically mention punishing the enterprise itself through a fine or by halting its operations. The punishment for personnel under the circumstances in Articles 134-37 is up to three years in prison, and under particularly severe circumstances, three to seven years in prison. In order to fully analyze this situation under the Criminal Law and make a proposal as to how it should be amended or reinterpreted, it will be necessary to consider each one of these elements separately and then in combination with one another. This methodology will parse out the strengths and weaknesses in the law.III. The Specifics of Criminal Sanctions for Labor Safety ViolationsA. The Accident Must Have Already OccurredThe ffectt of requiring that the accident must occur and must involve some sort of death, injury, or other severe result is that it precludes liability for reckless endangerment of workers or pre-accident cirmcumstances that create a very high degree of risk. Also, if the accident only involves a small or unserious consequence, then, absent some sort of minor criminal sanction (such as a fine), the law may proffer no incentive for a corporation to fix the problem and thereby avoid a larger or more serious accident in the future.B. The Accident Must be Due to Violations Already Pointed OutThis element clearly shows that there must be actual knowledge of the safety violation on the part of those in charge and therefore rules out imputed knowledge. Without the possibility of prosecution for imputed knowledge, managers and personnel will have little incentive to inspectfacilities and unearth latent hazards, except in the case where there are direct orders from the local MOLSS branch. The employees themselves may not have the technical skills necessary to spot a problem and avoid accidents. In addition, MOLSS inspection teams may be short handed and real inspections may not be conducted with regularity. Thus, this requirement that the violation already be pointed out inhibits prosecution and provides no incentive for managers to conduct regular inspections and refrain from negligent behavior.C. The Personnel Directly Responsible Will Assume Criminal LiabilityThe largest problem with this phrase is that it is vague and undefined. The primary issue is whether the law holds the corporation, and thus the personnel responsible, or merely holds the personnel actually directly responsible liable for the damages caused. This debate is prominent in Chinese legal circles, and some scholars have argued vigorously that it should be the corporation and thus the personnel that are held responsible. If it is the corporation that is primarily responsible, then this distinction may open the door for liability higher up the management chain. The major question then becomes: how high up in the chain does the procurator need to go in order to ensure that the personnel with real power correct safety violations. Obviously, there is no one right answer, however there must be a balance between the power to correct the violation and the opportunity and duty of oversight of the workspace. This issue will become more salient when discussing possible amendments to the law.D. Prosecuting Under a Theory of MurderIf there is an accident that causes the deaths of employees, then why can it not be prosecuted under a theory of negligent homicide? It should be noted here that negligent and intentional murder are certainly theories that could be used under the Chinese Criminal Law. If the purpose of connecting criminal law and the labor law is to protect against death or injury then should there not be a reference in the Labor Law that points the procurator towards the provisions in the Criminal Law that deal with murder? This important question is one which will be addressed in the following sections.IV. Proposal for a New Model of Enforcing Labor Safety Laws and RegulationsA. Negligent Homicide1. Mens reaAccording to the PRC Criminal Law, there are only two mental states that may apply to crimes therein: negligent and intentional. However, scholars have argued in favor of limiting the scope of negligent crimes within the Criminal Law, which may create a problem for this analysis because the provisions on safety accidents within the code do not make specific mention of negligence. Thus, in order to apply the provisions in the Criminal Law dealing specifically with safety accidents there might need to be amendments that allow for such crimes to be prosecuted under a theory of negligence. If, however, prosecution were to proceed under a theory of murder, a negligent mental state would be expressly permitted in the provisions of the Criminal Law. In the end, success may depend on the theory chosen, and the willingness of the procurator and judge to allow a negligence theory in a labor safety violation case.Furthermore, in dealing with criminal prosecution for labor safety violations the most appropriate option for mens rea is criminal negligence. Although intentional viIlations of thestandards themselves might be possible, the harm was most likely caused by the negligence of the manager or corporate officer. Proceeding under a theory of negligent homicide, it will be necessary to determine the duty, the breach of that duty, and the causal connection between the act or the omission of the manager or corporate officer and the death or harm to the worker.2. DutyIn western criminal law, negligent homicide will be predicated on some type of duty whether it be statutory, contractual, or familial. The Chinese Criminal Law makes no mention in the negligence provisions of any sort of duty owed to the person harmed or injured. Although negligence itself is not predicated on a breach of duty within the Chinese Criminal Law, this does not mean that there is no duty to workers upon which a theory of negligent homicide might be advanced. The Labor Law expressly states that every worker has a right to a safe workplace. The duty of the employer to provide the employee with a safe work place is further reinforced by the recently promulgated Safe Production Law. Both the Labor Law and the Safe Production Law include provisions which state that if violations of the laws constitute a crime, then criminal liability will be imposed. It seems possible then, if not entirely logical, that a procurator could premise a prosecution for negligent homicide under Article 233 of the Criminal Law on the duty that the employer or employing unit owes to the worker to provide a safe work place under the Labor Law and the Safe Production Law. Because both of these laws are national laws they are controlling under all circumstances pertaining to laborers in the PRC.3 PunishmentThe final question to resolve is: which one of the corporate actors should be held responsible for breaching a duty under the Labor Law and thereby causing an accident and injuries or deaths of workers. Ideally, such provisions would provide an incentive to whomever in that particular enterprise truly has the power to correct the problems that could potentially lead to accidents by directing funds to the m *--anager overseeing the workers or an inspection team. Designing a catchall provision of that nature or manipulating provisions within the pre-existing law to that end is surely not an easy task.B. Reckless EndangermentThe Chinese Criminal Code makes no allowances for prosecution under a theory of reckless endangerment. However, this provision is not unheard of under the criminal law in other countries. This kind of liability will most likely be un-welcomed by Chinese authorities, but criminal liability beyond administrative fines would certainly provide a stronger deterrent for corporate officers and managers to be stricter and more disciplined regarding inspections of the facilities. Any liability for mangers or officers in this context would have to be sought under an amendment to the Chinese Criminal Law.译文一：出自：2004年华盛顿大学华盛顿大学《全球研究法律评论》中华人民共和国的刑事责任劳动安全行为名字：约翰•巴尔扎诺摘要：我国工人正处于困难时期。
国际法律中英文对照外文翻译文献
中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文:Evasion of Law and Mandatory Rules in Private International LawINTRODUCTIONIT has often been asserted that English private international law has no doctrine of evasion of the law. It is true that English law has never developed a general doctrine, like the French one of fraude a la hi, to deal with cases of evasion. Nonetheless, evasion of the law has been recognised as a problem in at least some areas of private international law, and an increasing number of specific anti-evasion measures have been introduced in response to this. The English approach towards evasion is a pragmatic one rather than being based on any broad underlying theory. In particular, the fundamental questions have not been addressed of what is wrong with evasion of the law and how it can be dealt with most effectively. The purpose of thisarticle is to examine the present law on evasion, determine what is wrong with evasion of the law and put forward proposals for a principled approach to deal with the problem.I THE PRESENT LAW ON EV ASIONThe most obvious sense in which the law is evaded is when persons deliberately flout the law, for example a taxpayer fails to declare all his income to the Inland Revenue, or a person smuggles goods into a country in breach of import controls. In such cases the party seeking to evade the law wishes no law to apply. The private international lawyer may be concerned with this type of case, for instance the English courts may be asked to enforce a contract the performance of which involves the illegal export of goods.Of more interest to the private international lawyer, and the subject of this article, are those cases where laws are evaded by persons showing a preference for the application of one country's law rather than that of another. People can show this preference by going to another country in the expectation that that country's law will be applied to their affairs. This has happened in the sphere of family law where evasive marriages, divorces and abduction of children are well known. Evasion can also take place in the commercial sphere where the particular method of evasion takes a different form, i.e. contractual agreements that a particular law will apply. Those areas in which evasion has been recognised as being a problem: marriage, divorce, child abduction and custody, and contract, will now be examined in detail, after which some conclusions will be drawn on the nature of the approach towards evasion adopted under the present law.A. Evasive MarriagesEvasive marriages have been a well known phenomenon since the earliest days of conflict of laws. Starting with Brook v. Brook in the middle of the nineteenth century there has been a spate of reported cases involving English couples going to Denmark or Germany to marry in order to evade the English law on the prohibited degrees of marriage. After the marriage the couple would return to live in England. The English courts strongly objected to the attempt to evade English law in these cases and refused to recognise the foreign marriage. The technique for dealing with the evasion was to classify the issue in the case as being one of essential validity and to apply the law of the domicile of the parties, England, to the question of the validity of the foreign marriage. In other words, the courts moulded their private international rule on capacity to enter a marriage to stop evasion of the law. The gradual relaxationin the prohibited degrees under English law has largely meant the end of such instances of evasion. However, it still remains the case that, for example, an uncle will be unable to marry his niece in England but he may be able to do so under some foreign systems of law.Better known to laymen than the Danish marriages cases are the Gretna Green marriage cases.At one time young English couples would elope to Scotland in order to evade the English requirement of parental consent for the marriage of a child between the ages of 16 and 21. Such a child could marry in Scotland without parental consent, there being very much less formality for marriage under Scots law. The reduction of the age of majority to 18 in England has meant that in most cases there is no longer any need for young couples to go to Scotland to enter into a valid marriage. However, the attitude of the English courts towards Gretna Green marriages is instructive and contrasts strongly with their attitude towards the Danish marriages. No objection was made to the parties evading the English requirement of parental consent by going to marry in Scotland and these Scots marriages were recognised as being valid. The issue was classified as one of formal validity and the law of the place of celebration was applied to the marriage, i.e. Scots law. The private international law rule was not moulded to stop evasion.The traffic in evasive marriage was not all one way. There are well known instances of French couples coming to England in order to evade stringent French requirements of parental consent to the marriage of children up to the age of 25. Not surprisingly, in the light of the Gretna Green marriages, these English marriages were regarded as being valid, despite the clear evasion of French law by the parties.B. Evasive DivorcesIn 1868 in Shaw v. Gould Lord Westbury, speaking in the context of a Scots divorce obtained by an English domiciliary said that:No nation can be required to admit that its domiciled subjects may lawfully resort to another country for the purpose of evading the laws under which they live. When they return to the country of their domicile, bringing back with them a foreign judgment so obtained, the tribunals of the domicile are entitled or even bound, to reject such judgment, as having no extra-territorial force or validity.A hundred years later there was considerable judicial concern that, whilst the rules on recognition of foreign divorces should be liberalised and made more flexible, "quickie" divorces obtained abroad after a short period of residence should not be recognised. The technique for achieving this was to introduce at common law a realand substantial connection test as a basis for the recognition of foreign divorces. A petitioner who was merely temporarily in, for example, Nevada when he obtained his divorce, would not be able to satisfy this test and the foreign divorce would not be recognised. The attitude subsequently changed and the Recognition of Divorces and Legal Separations Act 1971 enshrined the Law Commission's philosophy that, if there had been forum shopping, the harm had already been done, and in order to prevent a limping marriage the foreign divorce should still be recognised in England.This still remains the general view to this day. However, there are two specific statutory anti-evasion provisions which constitute exceptions to this general rule. Both provisions are concerned with extra-judicial divorces. There was a concern shown by the judiciary and then by Parliament that parties should not be able to evade the English system of divorces granted by courts and the English law on financial provision on divorce by obtaining in England an extrajudicial divorce. Since 1974 such extra-judicial divorces have therefore been denied recognition. There was then a concern that the particular statutory provision denying recognition to this type of divorce could itself be evaded by English residents going abroad, for example on a day trip to France, to obtain an extra-judicial divorce which, because it would be recognised in their foreign domicile, would be recognised in England. The latest version of the relevant statutory anti-evasion provision seeks to prevent this by denying recognition to extra-judicial divorces obtained, without proceedings, outside the British Islands if either spouse had for a period of one year immediately preceding the institution of the proceedings habitually been resident in the United Kingdom. The latter provision does nothing to prevent an English domiciliary from evading his financial responsibilities to his spouse by obtaining an extra-judicial divorce in the state of his nationality, and then having this recognised in England. However, the Court of Appeal in Chaudhary v. Chaudhary held that, in such circumstances, recognition of the divorce would be contrary to public policy, thereby preventing the evasion.C. Child Abduction and CustodyThe most recent problem of evasion to arise in the family law area involves cases of child abduction and custody. If the parents of a child are in dispute over the custody of a child and the parent who has not been granted custody by the English courts seizes the child and removes it abroad, there is a deliberate flouting of the English law in that the English custody order has been disregarded. This is regarded as a very serious matter and Parliament has intervened to introduce new criminal offencesconcerned with taking a child under the age of 16 out of the jurisdiction without consent. There may also be an element of the errant parent preferring the application of a foreign law in that this parent may seek and obtain a custody order abroad. The problem is essentially one of getting a foreign court to recognise the English custody order or the custody rights (if no order has been made) and return the child to England. There are now international conventions on child abduction and custody, and if the child is removed to a country which is a party to these conventions, that country may be obliged to recognise the English custody order and rights. As far as the United Kingdom is concerned the international conventions were brought into effect by the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, which requires English courts to recognise foreign custody orders and rights in certain circumstances.D. Evasive ContractsIn contract cases the judiciary appear on the face of it to have a strong objection to evasion of the law. In theory the requirement laid down in Vita Food Products v. Unus Shipping that the parties' choice of the applicable law must be made in good faith, will stop all cases of evasion of the law. Even if the case involves an issue of formal validity of the contract the bona fides doctrine can still come into play. This contrasts with marriage cases where, as has been seen, the evasion of formal requirements is not objected to. However, in practice the requirement of a bona fide choice does not appear to restrict the parties' freedom to choose the applicable law. There is no reported English case in which the parties' choice has been struck out on this ground. It is important to notice that, although the Vita Foods Case introduced a restriction on party autonomy, this restriction did not apply on the facts of the case and the result was to allow parties to evade the Hague Rules.Much more important than the common law doctrine of bona fides are the specific statutory anti-evasion provisions that have been introduced into the area of contract. The most famous of these is contained in section 27 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. This section prevents evasion of English law, or the law of any other part of the United Kingdom, by restricting the parties' freedom to choose a foreign law. It provides that the Act and the protection it gives to consumers still has effect if the choice of law appears "to have been imposed wholly or mainly for the purpose of enabling the party imposing it to evade the operation of this Act". The section goes on to provide as an alternative that the Act will apply, despite the parties' choice, if "in the making of the contract one of the parties dealt as consumer, and he was then habitually resident in the United Kingdom, and the essential steps necessary for themaking of the contract were taken there, whether by him or by others on his behalf". The section, more controversially, also prevents parties from evading foreign law. It restricts the right of parties, whose contract has a foreign objective proper law, to choose the law of part of the United Kingdom by providing that, in such a case, certain sections of the Act will not apply as part of the proper law.Another example of a statutory anti-evasion provision is to be found in the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971, implementing the Hague-Visby Rules. Under the old Hague Rules there was a problem of people evading those Rules by the insertion of a choice of law clause in their contract. This gap was closed by the insertion in the Hague-Visby Rules of a new Article X to replace the original Article X in the Hague Rules. This lays down the territorial scope of the new Rules, and is coupled with a provision in the implementing legislation which states that the Rules, as set out in the Schedule to the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971, shall have the force of law. According to the House of Lords in The Hollandia the intention of Parliament was for the new Rules to apply whenever the case comes within Article X, regardless of whether there is a foreign proper law. Their Lordships were concerned to interpret the Act and the Hague-Visby Rules in such a way as to prevent the possibility of their being evaded. As Lord Diplock said:[the Hague-Visby Rules]should be given a purposive rather than a narrow literalistic construction, particularly wherever the adoption of a literalist construction would enable the stated purpose of the international convention, viz., the unification of domestic laws of the contracting states relating to bills of lading, to be evaded by the use of colourable devices that, not being expressly referred to in the rules, are not specifically prohibited.An Ad Hoc ApproachWhat is noticeable about the present law on evasion is that no general principle has been developed to explain why evasion is regarded as objectionable in some cases but not in others. The law seems quite inconsistent, with evasive Gretna Green marriages being regarded as perfectly acceptable but evasive Danish marriages being regarded as beyond the pale. The whole approach towards evasion is essentially an ad hoc one; not only are different types of evasive marriage treated differently, but also evasive marriages are treated in isolation from evasive divorces or evasive contracts. This ad hoc approach extends to the technique for dealing with those cases where evasion is regarded as objectionable. In some cases specific statutory anti-evasionprovisions have been adopted to deal with evasion; in other cases the technique has been to mould common law rules to deal with the problem. The result is that the present law on evasion can be seen to be unduly complex, uncertain and inconsistent.A more principled approach is needed but before this can be developed an answer is required to the fundamental question, which so far has been ignored under English law: what is wrong with evasion of the law?II WHAT IS WRONG WITH EV ASION OF THE LAW?A. Moral GuiltThe term evasion is a loaded one, with connotations of shifty, underhand behaviour. It is easy to fall into the trap of automatically assuming that a desire to evade the law is in itself morally reprehensible. This is what has happened in the area of contract choice of law. The requirement that the choice of the applicable law must be made in good faith concentrates on the motives of the parties, and if these are impure the choice is necessarily regarded as a bad one and to be struck out. Yet there is nothing wrong in principle with parties choosing the law to govern their transactions. Indeed, it is very desirable that they should make such a choice. Party autonomy produces certainty in the law and upholds the expectations of the parties. In some cases this choice may be made on the basis that the application of one law is more convenient than that of another. In other cases the choice may be made on the basis that the content of one law is preferred by the parties to that of another. For example, the parties to an international insurance or shipping contract may choose the law of England to apply, despite the fact that there is no connection with this country, because they regard English law as being well developed in this area. No one would stigmatise this type of conduct. Is it any worse if the parties choose a law to apply because they prefer some specific provisions of that law to that of some other country? What the parties are usually trying to do in such a case is to ensure that a law is applied which provides that their transaction, whether it is a commercial contract or a marriage, is valid. This should not be a cause for concern, nor should it be condemned on the mistaken basis that the parties' motives are impure. Moreover, there is something slightly hypocritical in the judiciary making this type of moral judgment when they themselves are quite prepared to escape from applying a law the content of which is not to their liking by using such devices as public policy and renvoi.Whilst there is nothing wrong with the parties' motives in cases of evasion, this does not mean that the practice is unobjectionable. In some cases the evasion mayinvolve unfairness to someone else; the evasion may even be against the national interest.译文：国际私法中的法律规避和强制性规则引言人们常常说，英国的国际私法学说中没有法律规避原则。
法学毕业论文法学外文翻译中英文对照
英文原文：Hｏw Ｒeal Ｉs Chｉna’s Real Estate Bubｂle And ＷhaｔShｏｕld Be Done ａｂｏut ＩtThinｋ U.S. houｓｉｎg priceｓ havｅｇone beｒserk？Ｔry ｔho ｓe in Ｓｈanｇhai aｎd Ｂeijing， where the cost oｆｈoｍeｓ has ｂeeｎ rｉsing an ｅstｉmaｔｅd 25％ａnnually in ｒecent yeaｒs。
Th ａｔ’ｓｔwｉce tｈｅ jｕmｐ in ｔｈe median sale pｒicｅｏf ｅxisti ｎg Ｕ。
S. homes oｖer tｈe pａｓt ｙear, ａnd a sｉｇn ｔhａｔＣh ｉna’ｓ real ｅｓtate mａrｋet iｓ in ｔｈｅ mｉdst oｆｗｈａt ｓome ｏbsｅrveｒs vｉew as ａ potentially exｐlosiｖe ｂubblｅ.The ｂubｂle is ｒoｏted iｎsuｃh fａctｏrs ａｓ Chｉｎa's ｓtrong ecｏnomic growｔh ｓincｅ 1990 and ｉnｖestor ｂets ｔhat Cｈｉｎa’s curreｎcy， the yuaｎ， will ｂe revalｕed uｐwarｄ in tｈe near ｆｕtｕre. Buｔ such spｅculaｔion is heｌｐing push the ｐｒicｅ of homes beyond tｈｅｒｅach of miｄdｌe ｃlaｓs ｃiｔizenｓ in key Ｃhinｅsｅ ciｔｉes and raｉｓinｇ the prospect oｆａｓudｄen marｋet collapｓｅthaｔ could ｔhrｅａten tｈｅｃountrｙ's shａky bank ｉｎg seｃtor aｎd wiｐe out tｈｅｌife ｓaｖｉｎｇs of manｙｆａmilieｓ。
法律英语作文
法律英语作文In the contemporary era of globalization, the significance of Legal English as a specialized language for the legal profession cannot be overstated. Legal English is not merely a collection of legal terms and phrases; it is a precise and formal mode of communication that transcends cultural and linguistic barriers, facilitating international legal discourse and cooperation.The Role of Legal English in International LawInternational law, by its very nature, requires a common language for the interpretation and application of legal principles across different jurisdictions. Legal English serves as this common language, ensuring that the nuances of legal concepts are accurately conveyed without the confusion that can arise from translation.Standardization and ClarityThe standardization of Legal English is crucial for the drafting of contracts, treaties, and legal documents that are enforceable across borders. It provides clarity by establishing a set of terms and expressions that have universally accepted meanings, reducing the risk of misinterpretation.Education and TrainingTo meet the demands of an increasingly global legal profession, law schools and professional development programs have integrated Legal English into their curricula. Students are taught not only the vocabulary and grammar but also the logical structure and persuasive techniques that are characteristic of effective legal writing and argumentation.Challenges and SolutionsDespite its utility, Legal English presents challenges for non-native speakers, including idiomatic expressions and complex sentence structures. To overcome these, continuous practice, exposure to legal texts, and the use of specialized dictionaries are essential. Additionally, technology, such as translation software and online resources, can assist in understanding and mastering Legal English.The Future of Legal EnglishAs international trade and cooperation continue to grow, so does the importance of Legal English. It is expected to evolve with the legal profession, incorporating new terms and adapting to changes in international law. The future of Legal English lies in its ability to remain a dynamic and accessible tool for legal professionals worldwide.ConclusionIn conclusion, Legal English is a fundamental tool for legal professionals operating in a global context. It is the bridgethat connects legal systems and enables the international community to engage in legal discourse with precision and clarity. As the world becomes more interconnected, the mastery of Legal English will be an indispensable skill for those in the legal field.。
法学毕业论文之外文翻译
浙江工业大学毕业论文外文资料翻译学院(系):法学院专业：09法学二专姓名：XXX学号：200809300XXX外文出处：1、《Frontiers of Law in China》2010,52、《Center for Comparative Literature and Cultural Studies MonashUniversity Melbourne》附件： 1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文附件1：外文资料翻译译文一死刑听证制问题研究YUguan yang摘要：死刑主要用于对最严重的罪犯的惩治。
给这些案子举行公众听证制似乎是保证司法公正性的最佳方式。
死刑案的公众听证制在维护司法公正性和保障人的权利有着重大的意义，并且早已获得国内外的关注。
本文将解释美国相关死刑听证制机构的条件，从权利和义务角度定义公众听证制的性质，分析死刑公众听证制的特殊内涵，介绍外国的一些死刑听证制的案例，并且分析当前中国对于死刑公众听证制的实行，并通过一些建议实现对听证制的推进。
关键词：死刑案，公众听证制，国际标准，中国的实践死刑案听证制必须严格遵守犯罪公正性的国际标准，尤其是与美国相关的公众听证制。
公众听证制包括公开审判和公开宣判，两者都包括几个方面。
作者想分享一些与联合国相关文件死刑案公开审判和宣判的理解。
1,公众听证制的意义和要求1.1,公众听证制在权利和义务方面的基本原理公众听证制包括公开审判和公开宣判。
公开审判是指法庭上的一系列活动，比如调查证人，调查案件事实，双方证据交换等。
公开审判的核心是对审判活动的处理，由当场公开起诉、辩护陈述、询问证人、核查证据和法庭最后陈词组成。
在形式上，公开审判有两个要求：首先，包括案件名称、起诉罪名、被告人身份、法庭审判的时间地点和出庭人员在内的信息必须提前公布；其次，必须为公众的旁听提供足够的便利，任何人都应当被允许参加旁听，而记者也应被允许对审判进行报道。
公开审判的参加人员不能被限制于某一特定类型；但是法律法规指定的例外，比如法庭审议，任何想要参加旁听的人都不能被拒绝；所有的法庭活动，尤其是询问证人和检验证据都应该公开进行。
法学专业 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制
Legal Regulation of Administrative Monopoly As Viewed fromChinese Antimonopoly LawLing WangLaw school of Shandong University of TechnologyZibo 255049, Shandong, ChinaAbstractThe administrative monopoly breaks the principle of justice, and has large harm to the society. The special chapter in Chinese Antimonopoly Law regulates the contents and corresponding legal responsibilities of administrative monopoly, but the law still has some deficiencies. The Chinese Antimonopoly Law should be perfected from increasing the operation property, confirming the comprehensive legal responsibilities, confirming the law enforcement agency of anti-administrative monopoly, expanding the range of legal regulation and establishing the judicial review system.Keywords: Chinese Antimonopoly Law, Administrative monopoly, RegulationIn china, the administrative monopoly mainly means the behaviors that administrative subjects harm the market competition and destroy socialism market economy order by the administrative power. The administrative monopoly initially belongs to economic monopoly, and its harm is more than economic monopoly, and it destroys the principle of justice, and induces the occurrence of unfair competition and monopoly in special market, and it harms the benefits of most market subjects, and largely wastes effective resources, and blocks the establishment and perfection of the socialism market competition mechanism. Therefore, it should seek solution and regulation methods from various approaches for the administrative monopoly. Only in this way, the obstacle of Chinese economic system reform and the development of market economy can be removed, which can promote the quick development of economy, enhance the living level of people, improve the total survival environment, and realize the harmony and stability of the society.1. Regulation of administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly LawFor the regulation of administrative monopoly, there are many researches and discussions among Chinese scholars, and the system reform view and the legal regulation view are representative views. The system reform view thinks that the administrative monopoly is the product of system, and it can be completely solved by deepening the economic system reform and the political system reform, and the legal measure is hard to solve the problem of administrative monopoly. The central content of the legal regulation view is that the administrative monopoly is very harmful, and it must be forbidden mainly bythe laws. The legal regulation view is also can be divided into two factions, and one is to mainly use the administrative law to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the other thinks that Chinese Antimonopoly Law is the main power to regulate the administrative monopoly.Because Chinese economic and political system reform is a gradual process which needs quite long-term endeavors, and this transfer needs large patient and willpower, so the administrative monopoly has been a very hot potato at present, and it has seriously blocked the economic development of China with large social harms, and it even blocks the economic and political system reforms which is being in China, so it must be forbidden as soon as possible, or else, the large destroying function on the development of Chinese economy will be hard to image. Therefore, it is too ideal to only depend on the system reform to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the effect is not obvious. In the present national situation, law is the feasible measure to regulate the administrative monopoly. Because the administrative monopoly roots in economic monopoly and has many characters and harms of economic monopoly, more and more legal scholars want to utilize Chinese Antimonopoly Law to regulate the administrative monopoly. “It is the characteristic of Chinese Antimonopoly Law to take the administrative monopoly as the control object of antimonopoly, and it seems a necessary selection according to the national situation, because the administrative monopoly forming in traditional planned economy system is impossible to be removed by administrative measure, and it can only be solved by the legal measure, i.e. the Antimonopoly Law (Zhang, 1993, P.357)”.At August 1 of 2008, Chinese Antimonopoly Law became effective in people’s expectations, and the fifth chapter specially regulates the content of administrative monopoly, and the articles from 32 to 37 respectively generalize the elimination of administrative power abuse and the behaviors of competition limitation, and completely regulate the concrete represent form of administrative monopoly, and article 51 regulates corresponding legalresponsibilities. Thus，the regulation of administrative monopoly is first regulated in law, andthe legal approach is the main measure to govern the administrative monopoly, which indicated that the legal regulation view had been adopted finally. The contents of administrative monopoly in the Antimonopoly Law embodies the advancement of Chinese legal theory study and legislation technology, and it showed the decision of Chinese legislators to standardize the enforcement of administrative power and stop the abuse of administrative power. Of course, law is only one most important measure to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the reasonable and effective reforms in polity and economy also have very important meanings for the regulation of administrative monopoly behaviors.2. Deficiencies of administrative monopoly regulation in Chinese Antimonopoly LawRelative regulations about administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly Law are active and helpful exploration to regulate administrative monopoly behaviors by law, and corresponding legal regulations are deeply meaningful and influencing to eliminate the bad influences of administrative monopoly, promote the fair competition, establish normal market order, and guarantee the ordered development of market economy. However, whether relative corresponding systems or the articles in the chapter 5 still have some deficiencies, and the anti-administrative monopoly much still remains to be done.2.1 Regulations are too fundamental to operateThe articles in the chapter 5 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law are some principled articles lacking in operation, which make the judiciary and law enforcement agencies are difficult to distinguish. And many abstract concepts such as what extent can achieve administrative monopoly, and what is that the abuse of administrative power to block the free circulation of commodities can not be defined clearly in only five legal articles, so the catchwords ofanti-administrative monopoly appear incapable. At August 1 of 2008, the first day when Chinese Antimonopoly Law was implemented, Chinese State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine encountered the first case about Chinese Antimonopoly Law. However, in the expectation of ten thousands of people, this case came to an untimely end, and though the court adopted the article that the limitation of actions was over to evade this case, but it can be supposed that if the court can not evade it by relative reasons, what is the result? Was the behavior that Chinese State Administration of Quality Supervision forced to push the electric supervision code business of Citic Guoan Information Technology Co., Ltd with its own shares in 69 kinds of product an administrative monopoly behavior? The result might reach the same goal by different routes. And relative regulations about the current antimonopoly law endow law-officers too much discretion to make them to “go after profits and avoid disadvantages”.2.2 The regulations about the legal responsibility of administrative monopoly are deficientChinese Antimonopoly Law regulates the civil, administrative and criminal responsibilities assumed by managers who implement monopoly behaviors in detail, but for the legal responsibility of the behaviors of administrative monopoly, only the article 51 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law regulates that “If administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition, shall be ordered by superior authorities to correct themselves; people in direct charge and people directly involved shall be imposed administrative punishment. The antimonopoly execution authorities shall supply suggestion to related superior authorities to handle according to law.” Many administrative responsibilities such as “shall be ordered by superior authorities to correct themselves; people in direct cha rge and people directly involved shall be imposed administrative punishment” form different legal results of different subjects to implement monopoly behaviors, so peoplebegin to suspect the justice of laws, which virtually helps the administrative subjects to implement administrative monopoly, and the deterrent force will be reduced largely. At the same time, though the responsibility of Chinese Antimonopoly Law is too lighter and becomes a mere formality, and the law is not obeyed and strictly enforced, so the administrative monopoly remains incessant after repeated prohibition.2.3 The jurisdiction of antimonopoly law enforcement institution is limitedThe definition about the anti-administrative monopoly law enforcement agency in the fifty first article of Chinese Antimonopoly Law is still blurry, and on the one hand, the supervision procedures should be independently established to restrain laws by this law, and on the other hand, the law regulates that the administrative monopoly should be dominated by superior authorities, and the article that “If administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition will be handled by another regulation, shall be applied to another regulation” has left large space for the rights of relative departments and supervision institutions, which has eliminated the jurisdiction ofanti-administrative monopoly law enforcement agent to the administrative monopoly. At the same time, it is not reasonable to handle the behaviors of administrative monopoly by the superior authority of lawbreaker for the legal responsibilities. The superior authority is not a specific authority, because the authorities implementing administrative monopoly are different, and the law enforcement has be decomposed to various functional authorities, which will easily induce repeat law enforcements or blank law enforcement. Furthermore, the superior authority is not the authority to specially dominate administrative monopoly, or the special judicial authority, and it just is common law enforcement authority (Wang, 2007). Staffs in superior authority may not have strong antimonopoly consciousness, and both the cognition and treatment result all lack in authorities, and they also lack in the ability to teat the cases about administrative monopoly.2.4 The range of administrative monopoly regulation is too narrowThe article 33 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law limits the object of administrative monopoly in the domain of goods trade. “Administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to carry out following conducts, to hinder the free flow of the commodities between regions”. In fact, the character of the transfer of modern economic industry structure is that the proportion of the service industry is enhanced increasingly, and if the object of the anti-administrative monopoly is only limited in the domain of goods trade, the domain which is bigger and occupies more proportion will be abandoned out of the supervision of Chinese Antimonopoly Law. Though the article 34 forbids and excludes that exterior managers participate in local bid invitation and bidding activities, and the article 35 forbids and excludes that exterior managers invest or establish branches including the domainof service trade in local region, but there are many items in the service industry out of these two ranges, and the legal regulation about administrative monopoly behaviors in the domain of service industry is still blank in Chinese Antimonopoly Law.2.5 Regulation measures for abstract administrative monopoly are deficientThough Chinese Antimonopoly Law has prohibitive regulations about the behaviors of abstract administrative monopoly, but it regulates nothing about legal responsibility and relief ways. If the illegal behavior of abstract administration can not be redressed in time in practice, it will always induce larger harm (Huang, 2001). Many administrative monopoly behaviors in practice are implemented by the mode of abstract administrative monopoly behavior, and even certain concrete administrative monopoly behavior is always done according to administrative rules, but these rules must be examined and approved, recorded or agreed by superior people’s governments or charge authorities, and when they are dissented, the judgment right is always in original authorities which will be hard to deny the rules and byelaws what they constituted. In addition, most countries adopt the judicial review system to treat the abstract administrative behavior by the mode of inefficacy or nonexistence, but this system in Chinese Antimonopoly Law is deficient, so the illegal behaviors of administrative subject is hard to be redressed.3. Perfection of administrative monopoly regulation in Chinese Antimonopoly LawAbove aspects about the legal regulation for the administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly Law all need to be perfected and simple opinions are offered as follows.3.1 Using foreign mature experiences as references and increasing the operation feature of Chinese Antimonopoly LawLaw enforcement should be executed according to laws, and that means the clear description of legal concepts is the premise to exactly enforce laws, and the specific description of legal rules is the base to enforce laws strictly, but the problems about administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly are very complex, and some legal concepts have not been defined, and detailed legal standards and concrete legal responsibility should be further confirmed. Therefore, the content of the chapter 5 in Chinese Antimonopoly Law can be regarded as the principled legal rules to regulate administrative monopoly, and the explanation of general principles is a complex and hard task, just as when US modified the Antimonopoly Law, it added the word of “efficiency judgment”, and the American Competition Bureau used 13000 words to explain it. It is necessary to explain the criterion of general rules, and only to constitute suited rules as soon as possibly, and explain the principled articles in detail, the operation character of Chinese Antimonopoly Law can be added, and the uniform law enforcement standards can be established to effectively regulate the administrative monopoly behaviors by law.3.2 Establishing various administrative monopoly legal responsibility systemsThe past laws in China only regulated administrative monopoly by administrative responsibility, but ignored the function of civil responsibility and criminal responsibility. To more effectively regulate administrative monopoly, the particularity of administrative monopoly should be considered fully, and constitute comprehensive legal responsibilities including administrative responsibility, civil responsibility and criminal responsibility. When maintaining special competitors’ benefits, the behavior of administrative monopoly harms other competitors’ competition right at the same time, and it belongs to a kind of tort, and it should assume corresponding civil responsibility, and though the administrative responsibility includes the system of administrative compensation, but the range of administrative compensation is limited. And to better protect relative parties’ legal rights, Chinese Antimonopoly Law should specially regulate that victims of administrative monopoly have rights to institute civil actions, and obtain corresponding civil damages. At the same time, the behavior of administrative monopoly has large social harm, and it should be adjusted by the criminal law when it seriously harms the society, and furthermore, the social harm extent achieved by administrative monopoly is far bigger than some economic crimes and occupational crimes regulated in current criminal laws, so the measure of criminal punishment is necessary to be adopted.3.3 Confirming independent antimonopoly law enforcement institutions and perfect the law enforcement systemThe legal construction in China is to solve practical problems in the final analysis, and the setup of antimonopoly law enforcement institution is not exceptional. The antimonopoly law enforcement institution should be highly independent. To keep the independent is the life line of antimonopoly law enforcement institution, and the meaning of antimonopoly law, that is also the successful experience to effectively execute antimonopoly laws in most countries. And antimonopoly law enforcement institution must have high specialty character, and the antimonopoly law enforcement is not simple market management, and it comes down to the contents about economy, law and management, so it is a complex project. Professional organization system is the important factor to guarantee the effective operation of law enforcement institution.Independent and professional antimonopoly institution should be endowed by extensive administrative power, quasi-legislative power and quasi-judicial power, and that is the need to regulate administrative monopoly in China and the requirement to treat the development of international antimonopoly.3.4 Combining the generalization mode with the listing mode to specially limit the range of administrative monopolyBecause Chinese Antimonopoly Law defines the range of administrative monopoly by the listing mode, and it is mainly limited in the domain of goods trade, which induces that the regulation range of administrative monopoly in China is too narrow and lacks incorresponding flexibility. Using foreign relative experiences as references, China should adopt the mode combining the generalization mode with the listing mode to define the range of administrative monopoly.On the one hand, the main representative form of administrative monopoly should be listed specially, and the concrete regulations to regulate administrative monopoly behaviors in the domain of servicing industry should be added. And according to these rules, the antimonopoly law enforcement institutions should quickly judge representative administrative monopoly behaviors, and predict its legal result and increase the efficiency. On the other hand, according to relative authority data, the range of the industry about the national economy and the people’s livelihood should be specially defined, and the monopoly of these indu stries should be protected by laws, and the protective range and degree should also be defined, and for the behavior to illegally expand the monopoly range, corresponding punishment measures should be regulated.Through above analysis, the legal regulation of administrative monopoly behaviors in China just starts, and the relative rules about the administrative monopoly behaviors in Chinese Antimonopoly Law needs to be further perfected and crystallized, and the legal responsibilities about the administrative monopoly behaviors and the jurisdiction of law enforcement institution need to be further confirmed, and the regulation range of administration monopoly needs to be further expanded, and corresponding juridical relief approaches need to be gradually established. At the same time , the system reforms in the economic and political domain need to be further deepened, and the continual perfection of system reform can essentially reduce and stop the happening of administrative monopoly behaviors, and both the system reform and the legal regulation need to be strengthened, which is the essential way to solve the problem of administrative monopoly.从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制Ling Wang山东科技大学法学院摘要：行政垄断打破了公正原则，并且具有较大的社会危害性。
法律翻译论文
法律翻译论文经济全球化已经成为当今社会的发展趋势。
法律翻译随之越来越受重视。
下文是店铺为大家搜集整理的关于法律翻译论文的内容，欢迎大家阅读参考!法律翻译论文篇1谈法律英语翻译摘要：法律英语是有别于普通英语的应用性、功能性语言,且具有准确性、长句多等特点,因而法律英语翻译具有较强的专业性特色,必须确保能够尽可能准确无误地实现目的语与源语之间的对等。
关键词：法律英语语言特点翻译策略法律英语,属于法律语言,其英语表达方式为Legal Language或者是Language of the Law,是指表述法律科学概念以及诉讼或非诉讼法律事务时所用的语种或某一语种的部分用语。
法律翻译是不同法律语言之间的转换,译语必须尽可能遵循源语的涵义,尽可能准确地表达源语的真正含义,从而体现出法律语言的准确性和严谨性。
一、法律英语的语言特点(一)准确性法律语言作为一种规约性的正式语言,它所传递的主要内容是国家制定或认可并强制加以贯彻的行为规范和社会准则。
因此法律英语在词汇的选用上十分严谨、正式,努力做到准确、周密、不留漏洞、不产生歧义。
(二)古英语的使用古英语词的使用体现了法律语言的特殊性和权威性。
一些古词虽然在现代日常英语中已不再使用,但在法律语言或正式的司法场合仍在使用。
如:afore said (如前所述),here in after (在下文中),here under (在此之下) ;又如: here under, here in, here after, there under,there to, where by, where in.由以上例子可以看出,这些古英语词大多都是由前缀here, there以及where等与其它介词构成的复合词。
(三)长句的使用法律英语中的长句除主谓结构外,还有许多从句、短语等这些修饰成分,还有各种副词以及并列词等等,这些复杂长句使得法律英语更显现出与普通英语截然不同的特点,更凸显出其严谨的特性。
评价法律专业的英语作文范文
评价法律专业的英语作文范文English:Studying law provides a solid foundation for understanding the legal system and fosters critical thinking and analytical skills. It also equips students with the ability to communicate effectively and persuasively, which are essential skills in the legal profession. In addition, thestudy of law often involves extensive research and writing, which helps students develop strong research and writing abilities. Furthermore, the study of law often requires students to engage in debates and discussions, which helps to improve their public speaking and argumentation skills. Overall, the English writing skills acquired through studying law are not only valuable in the legal profession but also in other professional fields.中文翻译:学习法律为理解法律体系提供了坚实的基础，并培养了批判性思维和分析能力。
它还使学生具备了有效沟通和有说服力的能力，这些是法律职业中必不可少的技能。
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW IN THE TWENTYFIRST CENTURY部分翻译
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY部分翻译《21世纪环境法》第一部分参考译文概要：25年前，弗吉尼亚环境法创刊，于此同时，我开始了我的环境法工作生涯，如今能够参加弗吉尼亚环境法创刊25周年庆的盛典，我感到非常的高兴……新任总统曾说过一句广为流传的话，树木所引起的污染比汽车还要多，他似乎是下定决心要改革环境法规……关于环境法起源的记载一般都是说环境法兴起于十九世纪八十年代早期，过会进行大量立法，借以保护环境之时……包括环境保护联邦司法，regulatory takings issue（管制征用问题？），环境诉讼资格，以及关于控制政策的决定性规则的论战……”如今，环境保护一进更成为中国政府工作日程的重中之重，中国果断地从国外引进各种环境政策的创新之作，例如排污权交易，排污费，环保标签以及环保绩效等级……虽然发展中国家排污越来越多，对这些污染有着实质性的责任，但是京都议定书仅要求发达国家减排，其原因在于，发达国家曾经严重污染环境，才导致现在所产生的问题，为了解决问题，发达国家必首当其冲。
1.简介…………………………（见前文）我从环保协会的一个小小律师干起，杂志则是始于弗吉尼亚自然资源保护法日报。
在那个时候，新政府，新的环境政策诞生了。
前三届执政党，来自不同的政党，进行了大量的卓有成效的两党合作立法，为当今的环境保护打下了坚实的法规基础。
然而，现在，新任总统……。
尽管这位总统，个人魅力十足，但是对于这个改革，他的公众支持率微乎其微，因此其行政机构便试图抽离公众视野来实施此项改革。
政府机构不用立法动议的手段来放松环境法制，而是秘密的利用管理预算办公室在竞选活动中阻止环境法律的颁布。
最早将之曝光的是一位弗吉尼亚大学法学院学生发表在此刊上的文章。
埃里克·奥尔森，自然资源保护委员会的资深律师，他写了一篇文章：权力的悄然转移：行政命令下的行政管理与预算办公室环境保护署立法监督。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
中文2040字法学外文文献翻译题目: 对重大环境污染事故罪的立法思考姓名: 专业: 法学班级: 法学第二部位外文文献翻译原文国家环境政策法National Environmental Policy Act Nancy K. Kubasek, Gary S. Silverman Environmental Law, Fourth Edition, Cambridge University Press，2003 National Environmental Policy ActNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was signed into law on January 1, 1970, and may be characterized as a planning statute. It does three things directly:1. Establishes the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), the federal watchdog of environmental policy2. Requires federal agencies to take environmental consequences into account when they make certain decisions, which prior to NEPA, they could not do because consideration of such effects was rarely listed in agencies' enabling acts as a factor to be taken into account in agency decision making3. Requires that an environmental impact statement (EIS) be prepared for every major legislative proposal or other federal agency action having a significant impact on the quality of the human environmentCouncil on Environmental QualityThe least controversial aspect of NEPA was its first mandate: the creation of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), The CEQ is made up of three persons, one of whom is designated the chair. The role of the council is primarily advisory, mainly advising the president about environmental matters. The CEQ gathers and analyzes data, informs the president about the progress the nation is making toward cleaning up the environment, and recommends legislation that needs to be passed and issues that needs attention. Every year the CEQ uses the data it gathers to publish the President's Annual Report on Environmental Quality, which is available to the public.The CEQ also helps federal agencies to meet their EIS requirements under NEPAby reviewing drafts of these statements. The CEQ establishes regulations pertaining to NEPA procedures.Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)Far more controversial than the creation of the CEQ was the requirement of the environmental impact statement (EIS). This requirement has a widespread impact on several government agencies, as well as on private firms seeking to do business under governmental agency contracts or licenses. Although the process has been criticized by many of the groups affected, most studies of NEPA’s effectiveness have concluded that it has forced greater governmental awareness and more careful planning in many agencies.Several major issues pervade an analysis of the EIS requirement, ranging from who must file the EIS, and when, to disputes over what must be included in the statement, to whether the process is effective.Threshold ConsiderationsEvery time a federal agency undertakes an activity, it must decide whether to file an EIS. Filing an unnecessary EIS is a waste of time and money. Failure to file a necessary statement can be equally or more expensive if someone challenges the lack of an EIS and seeks an injunction. However, it is not always easy to know when an EIS is required. NEPA specifies three conditions that must be met for an EIS to be required. First, the activity must be federal. A federal activity is fairlybroadly defined. If, for example, a private sector construction firm wants to construct a building that requires a government license or if the project is going to be partly financed by a government loan, the licensing or lending agency is undertaking a federal activity.Whether an EIS is required for a federal activity depends on whether the other two criteria are met. The federal activity must be major. There are no dollar guidelines as to what constitutes a major activity. The courts generally say that the activity requires a substantial commitment of resources, with resources being broadly defined to include both financial and human resources. A substantial commitment of either type of resources is sufficient.The third criterion is that the proposed activity must have a significant impact on the human environment. The phrase significant impact on the human environment is so ambiguous that it initially generated substantial litigation. Then, in 1979 the CEQtried to resolve some of the controversy by adopting a series of guidelines for the implementation of NEPA’s procedural provisions. In these guidelines, the CEQ tried to define better what was meant by "significant impact". The CEQ stated that determining the significance of an impactnecessitated examining both the context and the intensity of the action. Looking at the context was said to require consideration of both the short-and long-term effects of the activity and looking at the impact of the activity on the local area, the region, and society as a whole.Procedure Under the EIS RequirementOne of the major criticisms of the EIS process is related to the time-consuming nature of the procedures necessary for preparing an EIS. Initially, the agency required to file the EIS will assemble a team of specialists to prepare a draft report. In many cases, this team will consist of outside consultants, many of whom may have a vested interest in preparing positive assessments so that they will be able to secure contracts from the agency in the future. Next, a draft version will be circulated within the agency, to be reviewed by several parties. There may frequently be disputes between reviews who are pro-agency or pro-industry and those who are more environmentally concerned. The draft may be revised as a result of these initial comments.Following the agency's completion of that draft, the document goes to the CEQ for review and comments. Then, in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act's rules forinformal rule making, the draft is published in the Federal Register for public comment. Many other agencies, including the EPA, will submit comments at this time, as will citizens' groups and business interests.After the public comments have been received, a similar process will be followed for the final draft. If a draft has been severely criticized, the agency is faced with the difficult decision of whether to try to repair the heavily criticized draft or months. Preparing a new draft is time-consuming and costly because all the steps have to be repeated with the new statement. However proceeding with an inadequate EIS may lead to a successful legal challenge by parties opposed to the action. Once the agency is satisfied with its final draft, it publishes it in the Federal Register. For a routine EIS, this entire procedure may take from 6 to 9 months. Court challenges may tie up the process for a year or longer.After publication of the final draft, the sufficiency of the draft may be challenged in court. The failure to file an EIS when required may also be challenged. This process of judicial review of the EIS has led to criticism by environmentalists. Whenreviewing the EIS, the court generally operates in an administrative law tradition, which means thatthe court will not substitute its judgment for the agency's. As long as the agency followed the proper procedures and included the requisite elements in the EIS, the court will allow the EIS to stand and the agency action to court. Under no circumstances can a party contest the weight given by the agency to any adverse consequences listed in the statement. The court will never forbid an action on the grounds that the consequences are too severe.第二部位外文文献翻译国家环境政策法库巴塞克，西尔弗曼环境法（第四版），清华大学出版社，2003 国家环境政策法（NEPA）于1970年1月1日签署生效，而且将被定性为一个规划章程。