教学动态

第一至六届“华政杯”全国法律翻译大赛决赛试题(部分)

发布于:2016-07-07 21:47     浏览量:5668
 

首届“华政杯”全国法律翻译大赛

决赛试题

Question 1.

The development of a body of legal ideas is inseparable from the creation of special legal language. As a source of technical vocabulary, however, the vernacular has obvious shortcomings; and in any case medieval English was not sufficiently standardised to render it suitable for official use. Latin was used for formal records, and made a permanent mark on the formalism of the common law, but it had the drawback that the Romans had used it before; its legal terminology was therefore already invested with technical meaning unsuited to the English context. The solution was found in a version of medieval Anglo-French known--at any rate once it degenerated--as "law French". French, of a kind, was the principal language of the common law from the thirteenth century until the seventeenth. Indeed, the majority of English legal terms are of French origin, though the legal meanings are purely English and result from the conversion of ordinary words into terms of art by bilingual lawyers who used French only as a professional dialect. This curious circumstance goes some way to explaining how England managed to produce a distinct system of law which over the centuries remained more or less impervious to Roman law influence.

Question 2.

   In recent years, terrorist use of the Internet has been gaining in popularity, with more than several thousand radical or extremist websites in existence today. Because the Internet transcends physical and geographic boundaries, combating terrorist incitement on the Internet requires cross-border global cooperation. Although the international community has taken steps to combat the problem with United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1373 and 1624, the state parties to these resolutions have been unable to close the significant holes in the current international legal framework, and there is little evidence that terrorist use of the Internet for purposes of incitement is being prosecuted successfully. Certain states are limited by their own domestic legal framework, including the United States, which is significantly limited in its ability to combat incitement because of the constitutional restraints imposed by the First Amendment. Despite more aggressive legislation and the absence of any constitutional limitations, the United Kingdom has been similarly unsuccessful in combating and prosecuting incitement to commit terrorist acts.

Question 3.

All disputes arising from the performance of this Contract shall, through amicable negotiations, be settled by the Parties hereto. Should, through negotiation, no settlement be reached, the case in question shall then be submitted for arbitration to the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission, Beijing and the arbitration rules of this Commission shall be applied. The award of this arbitration shall be final and binding upon the Parties hereto. The Arbitration fee shall be borne by the losing party unless otherwise awarded by the Arbitration Commission.

第二届“华政杯”全国法律翻译大赛决赛试题

第一题:英译中(20%

This LICENCE is granted to Name of Company of_Address to operate as a security company for supplying individuals to perform specified security work types for a period of 5 year(s) from May 1st, 2011 to April 30th, 2015 inclusive, provided that during the above period all prescribed fees are paid as prescribed, and subject to the provisions of the Security and Guarding Services Ordinance (Cap 460), and to those conditions specified overleaf.

第二题:英译中(50%

The Japanese judiciary is a unitary national system. Small claims and minor criminal offenses are overseen by summary courts, which are typically staffed by retired judges and prosecutors or former court administrative officials. District courts serve as the courts of first instance. In all but very minor cases, district court judges sit in panels of three. They are responsible for deciding all matters of fact and law. Criminal judgments can be appealed to one of the eight high courts. The Supreme Court, which functions as a constitutional court and court of last resort, sits atop this hierarchy. By law, Supreme Court justices are appointed by the cabinet. In practice, however, the judiciary selects who will fill a vacancy on the Court and the cabinet rubber-stamps the decision.

In keeping with its civil law origins, legislation is the primary source of law. There is only one jurisdiction and criminal procedure is uniform throughout Japan. Criminal law is compiled in two documents, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Penal Code, which are the primary references for criminal adjudication. Case law is of only secondary importance. The Supreme Court determines how various codes and statutes should be interpreted and establishes conventions for adjudicating cases. In addition to exercising judicial power, the Supreme Court is the highest authority on judicial administration.

第三题:英译中(30%

中国充分保障公民的选举权和被选举权。选举实行普遍、平等、直接选举和间接选举相结合以及差额选举的原则。中国宪法规定,年满18周岁的公民,不分民族、种族、性别、职业、家庭出身、宗教信仰、教育程度、财产状况、居住期限,除依法被剥夺政治权利的人外,都有选举权和被选举权。

第二届“华政杯”全国法律翻译大赛决赛参考译文

第一题:

兹向某公司,地址为_   ,签发执照,准许该公司以保安公司形式经营并提供人员执行指定类别的保安工作。牌照有效期为5年,由2011512015430,首尾两天包括在内,但在上述期间内所有订明的费用须按订明的规定予以缴付,并须受《保安及护卫服务条例》(460)的条文及背页所指明的条件所规限。

第二题:

日本法院体系属于单一国家体系。小额索赔及轻微刑事案件归简易法庭管辖;简易法庭的法官通常由退休的法官、检察官或法院书记官担任。地区法院是初审法院。除极其轻微的案件外,地区法院中的一般案件由三名法官组成合议庭审理。合议庭负责审理案件的全部法律和事实问题。刑事判决可向八个高等法院中的一个上诉。最高法院作为宪法法院和终审法院,位于整个法院体系的最顶层。依照法律,最高法院法官由内阁任命。但在实践中,实际由司法机关选拔最高法院法官,内阁仅履行形式上的批准权。

日本以制定法为主要的法律渊源,保持了大陆法系的传统。日本只有一个法域(有统一的司法权),全日本的刑事程序都是统一的。审理刑事案件的主要依据是《刑事诉讼法典》和《刑法典》。判例法的地位次之。最高法院负责解释各法典与制定法并创设惯例,供审判案件所用。除行使司法权外,最高法院还是最高的司法行政机关。

第三题:

China fully protects its citizens' right to vote and stand for election. Elections follow the principles of universal suffrage and equality, and are carried out in the forms of direct, indirect and competitive elections. The Constitution provides that all citizens of the People's Republic of China who have reached the age of 18, except persons who have been deprived of their political rights in accordance with the law, shall have the right to vote and stand for election, regardless of ethnic status, race, sex, occupation, family background, religious belief, education, property status or length of residence.

第三届“华政杯”全国法律翻译大赛决赛试题

第一题:英译中(50%

Parties to international sales of goods have developed certain special trade terms used commonly to allocate rights and duties between themselves. These trade terms have been expressed through various standard abbreviations and each type of term carries with it specific legal consequences. The most common trade terms are CIF and FOB. However, uncertainties may still exist because the interpretation of these terms can vary depending on the law governing the contract. For example, the definitions of these trade terms under the US Uniform Commercial Code are different from their definitions in English common law, so to avoid controversy, the parties should specify which set of definitions are to apply. Parties to international sales of goods can choose to adopt the definitions set out in INCOTERMS: International Rules for the Interpretation of Trade Terms. INCOTERMS are a series of international sales with terms, published by International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and widely used in international commercial transactions. These are accepted by governments, legal authorities and practitioners worldwide for the interpretation of most commonly used terms in international trade. This reduces or removes altogether uncertainties arising from different interpretation of such terms in different countries.

Under the WTO agreements, countries cannot normally discriminate between their trading partners. Grant someone a special favor (such as a lower customs duty rate for one of their products) and you have to do the same for all other WTO members.

第二题:中译英(50%

                                   (一)

《美国宪法》第五条修正案规定,被告人在任何刑事案件中都不能被迫做不利于自己的证人(自证其罪)。简单的说,也就是被告人有权保持沉默。如果被告人选择了保持沉默,检察官不能要求其作为证人,法官和辩护律师也不能强迫被告人提供证词。与此不同的是,在民事案件中被告可以被传唤为证人。

                          (二)

《美国宪法》第六条修正案规定,“在一切刑事诉讼中,被告人享有从律师处获得帮助为自己辩护的权利”。如赤贫被告人(无钱聘请律师的被告人)的罪行可能被实际判处六个月以上的监禁刑,法官必须为其指派一名律师,费用由政府负担。在实践中,只要赤贫被告人有可能被判处监禁刑的,法官几乎都会例行地为其指派一名律师。

                          (三)

刑事案件的结果往往事关被告人的生命和自由,也包括伴随定罪而来的不好的名声。考虑到这一事实,对于检方(通过公诉)旨在给嫌疑人定罪的这一权力而言,法律做出许多严格的限制。刑事被告人是被推定无罪的。检方必须证明对被告人所被指控罪名的每一构成要件都排除了合理怀疑,并达到了让所有陪审员满意的程度,才能推翻无罪推定。这就是美国法律保证清白之人入罪风险最小化的主要方法。

第四届『华政杯』全国法律翻译大赛决赛试题及参考译文

第一题:英译中(60%

The jury trial begins with the summoning of a group of people as potential jurors and eliciting information from them in a process called the voir dire(/vwɑr diər/). Each side in a trial can eliminate people as jurors by exercising challenges, either “for cause,” when there is a formal reason to believe that the juror cannot be fair or otherwise cannot serve in the particular case, or “peremptorily,” for which no reason need be given, but no potential juror can be dismissed peremptorily because of race or gender. For-cause challenges have no numerical limit, while peremptory ones are restricted. The number of jurors selected varies according to jurisdiction and the kind of case being tried, with juries usually numbering six or twelve, and always large enough so that any verdict is made by a group.

After the jury is selected, the presiding judge may describe some of the basic law and procedures that will apply to the case. This is followed by opening statements, first by the prosecution or plaintiff and then by the defense. These addresses to the jury outline the evidence the parties expect to produce.

The plaintiff or prosecutor then presents evidence through witnesses, documents, or other objects or materials that have importance for the case. Witnesses first respond to questions asked by the party who called them. This is called direct examination. The opposing party then may question the witnesses. This is cross-examination. After the plaintiff or prosecutor presents evidence, the defense can present evidence. When this process concludes, the plaintiff or prosecutor may offer rebuttal evidence.

When the presentation of evidence is complete, each side is allowed to make a closing argument, or summation, to the jury. The trial judge then gives instructions to the jury. The jurors are to consider the law as the judge supplies it to them, determine the disputed facts important to the action, and then apply that given law to those determined facts in order to reach a verdict.

329 words

陪审团审判的第一步,是召集起一批人作为备选陪审员,并在一个称为“预先审查”的程序中获取他们的一些信息。庭审双方都可以通过行使回避请求权来排除陪审团成员——既可以提出“有因回避”,即需要有正式的理由相信某名备选陪审员无法保持公正或由于其它原因不能在特定案件中担任陪审员,也可以提出“无因回避”,对回避请求无需给出理由,但任何一名备选陪审员均不能以种族或性别为由而被排除出去。有因回避没有次数限制,而无因回避有次数的限制。陪审团的人数因法域和案件种类而异,通常为612人,总是要有一定规模,以保证裁决是由一个群体作出的。                                      

选出陪审团之后,主持审判的法官会向所有陪审员说明适用于本案的基本法律及程序。接下来是开庭陈述,首先是检察官或原告陈述,然后是被告陈述。这些陈述向陪审团大致展现双方期望举出的证据。                                         

然后原告或检察官通过与案件有重要关系的证人、文件或其他实物及材料展示证据。证人首先回答传唤己方的问题,称为直接询问。然后对方可能提问,称为交叉询问。原告或检察官展示完毕证据后,被告可以展示证据。被告展示完毕,原告或检察官可以提出反驳证据。                                            

证据展示结束后,双方可以向陪审团作最后陈述。接下来法官会向陪审团作指示。陪审员要参照法官提及之法律,来决定对案件双方重要的争议事实,然后将法律适用于已经认定的事实并做出裁决。   

\

第二题:中译英(40%

在监管规范层面,中国《食品安全法》既没有明确界定权限的概念,也没有合理地划分权限类型,只是含糊地规定:县级以上卫生行政、质量监督、工商行政管理、食品药品监督管理部门应当按照法定权限和程序履行食品安全监督管理职责。权限概念总是与职权、职责、义务混为一谈。

监管权限漏洞会使监管权力系统趋于混乱和低效,最终导致监管失灵。监管权限漏洞之所以产生并被忽略,根源在于,食品安全监管还停留在道德自律之上。在某种意义上,中国食品安全法仍属一种本本法,而非行动法。从本本法走向行动法的关键,在于彰显法律的目的功能。

只有从道德自律走向权限规范控制、从本本法走向行动法,从支离破碎的个别规范走向权限规范体系,监管权限漏洞问题最终才有可能彻底解决。随着大部制的建立,原有监管权限漏洞问题并未迎刃而解,新的漏洞问题又频频产生,监管者处在新监管体制与旧监管规范的矛盾和冲突之中。修改《食品安全法》,填补监管权限漏洞,已刻不容缓。400字)

key words: 权限规范(norm of competence);监管权限(regulatory competence

道德自律(moral discipline/ self-discipline based on moral standards

As for regulatory norms, neither does the Food Safety Law in China explicitly define what competence is nor reasonably classify the varieties of thereof. It only roughly provides that the responsibilities of food safety regulation shall be assumed by the health administration, quality supervision, industrial and commercial administration, food and drug supervision and administration departments at or above the county level pursuant to the legal competence and procedures. The concept of competence is always confused with the concepts of authority, responsibility, and obligation.                                                          

Regulatory competence loopholes may gradually lead to confusion and inefficiency of the system of regulatory power, and finally to dysfunction of supervision. The fundamental reason for the emergence of regulatory competence loopholes and the ignorance of them lies in that food safety regulation rests still on moral discipline. In a sense, food safety law inChinais more like a law in code than law in action. The key step of transformation is to stress the function of the aim of law.             

Only when moral discipline turns to the establishment of norm of competence, a law in code evolves into a law in action, and only when fragmented individual norms become a systematic regulation system may we resolve thoroughly the problem of regulatory competence loopholes. The establishment of the super-ministry system has not effectively resolved the problem of competence loopholes yet, and new problems have emerged in this period of time, though. Regulatory bodies are at a crossroad between the new regulatory system and old regulatory norms. It is urgent to amend the Food Safety Law and fill up regulatory competence loopholes.                                                       

第五届『华政杯』全国法律翻译大赛决赛

第一题:英译中(60%

       (申明:选手不得使用任何参考资料,本部分在10点前完成并交卷)

At the beginning of the modern period capital punishment was in widespread use everywhere, enjoying unquestioned legitimacy, imposed in simple and aggravated forms, targeting many kinds of offence and offender, and undertaken in public. From the 17th century onwards, capital punishment underwent a slow process of modification, reduction and abolition. Historians have described the key stages of this decline as follows: (1) a reduced range of capital offences and eligible offenders; (2) the abolition of aggravated death sentences; (3) the removal of executions from the public gaze; (4) the adoption of technologies designed to speed death and reduce pain; (5) the emergence of a normative discourse challenging death penalty; (6) the appearance of sharp divisions in public attitudes towards the penalty’s propriety; (7) the development of more formalized legal procedures and safeguards; (8) a secular decline in the frequency of executions; and finally, (9) the movement to partial then complete abolition, first de facto, then finally, de jure.

This trajectory(发展轨迹) of decline, with minor variations, occurred in the USA just as it did throughout the western world. Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the USA appeared to be firmly on the abolitionist trajectory. States such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Rhode Island were in the vanguard of that movement: abolishing the death penalty in the 1840s and 1850s, long before most European nations considered doing so. In 20th-century USA, the number of executions steadily declined from a peak of 199 per year in 1933 to a handful per year in the 1960s and eventually to zero in 1967. During the period from 1967 to 1976 no one was put to death and it was during this period that the 1972 Furman decision struck down all of the states’ capital punishment statutes as unconstitutional. It is only in the last three decades, from 1976 to the present, that the USA looks significantly different. Nor is there anything especially anomalous about the American death penalty other than the fact that it is still in use.331 words

第六届『华政杯』全国法律翻译大赛决赛

第一题:英译中(50%

       (申明:选手不得使用任何参考资料,本部分在9:45前完成并交卷)

Criticism of the criminal justice system began to build in the 1970s and 1980s following a series of high-profile death-row acquittals in which innocent defendants endured decades-long imprisonment. Judges came under fire for poor fact-finding and citizen groups calling for criminal juries started to emerge. These citizen groups saw lay participation as a corrective to the limited life experience of judges and as a necessary safeguard for the defendant’s rights. In 1987, the Supreme Court acknowledged declining public trust in the judiciary by commissioning studies of foreign jury systems. Encouraged by this decision, the Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA) held national symposiums on juries in the early 1990s and citizen groups recruited people each year to participate in mock trials.

The origins of the saiban-in, however, cannot be directly traced to these civil activities. Instead, the saiban-in grew out of a government driven reform movement aimed at strengthening the rule of law. After the burst of the financial bubble in 1989, the government embarked on a major renovation of the country’s social, economic, and political arenas. Japan’s much hailed system of administrative guidance, in which highly trained bureaucrats used an array of extra-legal carrots and sticks to persuade regulated parties to adopt administrative goals, was blamed for the economic crisis. The Administrative Procedure Act and new laws involving freedom of information increased the transparency of bureaucratic decisions and made it easier for plaintiffs to challenge government decisions. Reforms to the electoral system in 1994 expanded judicial supervision of elections. Corporate reforms helped protect shareholder rights. A small claims procedure was introduced and judges were empowered to order businesses to disclose documents. In 1998, the Civil Procedure Code was amended to speed up trials and make litigation more attractive.289 words

第二题:中译英(50%

公正是法治的生命线。司法公正对社会公正具有重要引领作用,司法不公对社会公正具有致命破坏作用。

完善确保依法独立公正行使审判权和检察权的制度。各级党政机关和领导干部要支持法院、检察院依法独立公正行使职权。建立领导干部干预司法活动、插手具体案件处理的记录、通报和责任追究制度。建立健全司法人员履行法定职责保护机制。非因法定事由,非经法定程序,不得将法官、检察官调离、辞退或者作出免职、降级等处分。

明确司法机关内部各层级权限,健全内部监督制约机制。司法机关内部人员不得违反规定干预其他人员正在办理的案件,建立司法机关内部人员过问案件的记录制度和责任追究制度。完善主审法官、合议庭、主任检察官、主办侦查员办案责任制,落实谁办案谁负责。

推进以审判为中心的诉讼制度改革,确保侦查、审查起诉的案件事实证据经得起法律的检验。全面贯彻证据裁判规则,严格依法收集、固定、保存、审查、运用证据,完善证人、鉴定人出庭制度,保证庭审在查明事实、认定证据、保护诉权、公正裁判中发挥决定性作用。

       坚持人民司法为人民,依靠人民推进公正司法,通过公正司法维护人民权益。在司法调解、司法听证、涉诉信访等司法活动中保障人民群众参与。完善人民陪审员制度,保障公民陪审权利,扩大参审范围,完善随机抽选方式,提高人民陪审制度公信度。逐步实行人民陪审员不再审理法律适用问题,只参与审理事实认定问题。(574字)