2. Social development mainly depends on the legal system vs. Social development mainly depends on the German system.
3. The maintenance of social order mainly depends on law vs. Social order mainly depends on morality.
4. The rule of law can eliminate corruption, but the rule of law cannot eliminate corruption.
5. Substantive law is more important than procedural law, and procedural law is more important than substantive law.
6. In China, the advantages of referring to precedents outweigh the disadvantages.
7. Standardizing human behavior mainly depends on law vs. Standardizing human behavior mainly depends on morality.
8. High schools should offer special legal courses vs. There is no need to offer special legal courses in high schools.
9. Contemporary China abolished the death penalty vs Contemporary China should not abolish the death penalty.
10. Ruling the country by law is more important than ruling the country by virtue.
1 1. Lawyers should focus on the interests of customers vs. Lawyers should focus on national laws?
12. The Constitution of China is binding.
Add some legal debate topics with case background:
1, Miss Wang's request
Wang Jingxuan, a retired teacher, was hospitalized for one year because of cancer, and spent nearly100000 yuan on medical expenses. However, his condition deteriorated day by day and the patient was in great pain. The doctor diagnosed that the survival time was no more than one week. In this case, the patient repeatedly asked the doctor to euthanize himself, and the family members also hoped to let their loved ones get rid of the pain as soon as possible. After a painful choice, the doctor agreed to the request of the patient and his family. Wang Jingxuan stopped all treatment and died that day.
Debate: Should doctors bear criminal responsibility?
Prosecution: Doctors should bear criminal responsibility.
Defense: Doctors should not bear criminal responsibility.
2, Santana dispute
Huayin Company bought a Santana car in Xiujie on July, 2005 at a price of 2 10000 yuan. At that time, Huayin Company did not control the car purchase index. Zhang Yang, the manager of the company, said to Wang Qiang, an employee of the company: "The car will be bought in your own name and owned by the company." Since then, this car has been driven by Wang Qiang and used for the company's business activities. 1996, Zhang Yang went abroad to settle down. After that, Wang Qiang also left the company and drove away. He has been using this car. The road maintenance fee and insurance premium of the car were borne by Wang Qiang himself, and Huayin never asked Wang Qiang to return the car. 1June, 1998, employees of Huayin Company reported to the public security organ that Wang Qiang had encroached on the company's property and demanded that Wang Qiang be investigated for criminal responsibility.
Debate: Does Wang Qiang's behavior constitute the crime of duty embezzlement?
Prosecution: Wang Qiang's behavior has constituted the crime of duty embezzlement.
Defense: Wang Qiang's behavior does not constitute the crime of duty embezzlement.
3, fatigue death dispute
Shang Youcai is a 47-year-old laid-off worker. In February 2000, he was recommended by the street office to work in a non-staple food company. His main task is to send bean products to users and collect accounts. He is introverted and inarticulate, but he works hard. The leaders of the non-staple food company are very satisfied with his work performance and trust him. One day in March, the leader arranged for him to work the night shift in the company, telling him that the company leader trusted him very much and sent him to work the night shift. First, considering his family's financial difficulties, he can have 300 yuan a month to help his family, and second, he can take care of the company's property. Shang Youcai thanked the leader for his concern and agreed that he would work night shift in the company from March. He eats and lives in the company every day, gets up at five o'clock in the day to pick up the goods, then delivers them to the door, and does some chores in the company at night until eleven o'clock. For seven months, he has never asked for a day off or seen a doctor. 165438+ 10 On the first day of the month, employees of the company go to work and open the door of the duty room. Suddenly, he was found dead. After on-the-spot investigation by the Public Security Bureau, there was no property turnover and no signs of struggle in the room, and homicide and suicide were ruled out. After forensic autopsy, it was found that Shang Youcai, who had suffered from pulmonary tuberculosis, had serious damage to his lung wall, and it was determined that Shang Youcai died of pulmonary tuberculosis caused by overwork. However, Wei Lanzhen, Shang Youcai's wife, believes that her husband's tuberculosis occurred five years ago and has not recurred for five years. Her husband's death was caused by overwork after working more than 13 hours a day for seven consecutive months, and such overwork was caused by the arrangement of work by the non-staple food company, so she sued the court and demanded compensation of 360,000 yuan for personal death and mental damage.
Debate: Should non-staple food companies bear civil liability for Shang Youcai's death?
Plaintiff (Wei Lanzhen): The non-staple food company should bear civil liability for compensation for Shang Youcai's death.
Defendant (non-staple food company): Non-staple food company should not bear civil liability for Shang Youcai's death.
Step 4 forget the storm
Jiang Hong took a taxi and left a black handbag in the car. There is a notebook computer and an important set of technical software and text materials in the handbag. Anxious, he made an announcement on the radio, and stated that if there was any return, he would be grateful. There was no news for three days. In desperation, Jiang Hong went to broadcast an advertisement, stating that he would reward the finder with 8888 yuan. In the afternoon, taxi driver Liu Hai got in touch with Jiang Hong, returned the lost property and charged a reward of 8,888 pounds. Jiang Hong, the owner of the car, was very wronged and reported to the taxi company, accusing the driver of returning the goods he had picked up under the reward. According to the Regulations on Industry Management, the competent department punished the driver Liu Hai, ordered him to return the remuneration and returned it to the owner. The driver refused to accept the decision, sued the court and asked the competent department to return the reward.
Debate: Should the rental department return the remuneration?
Plaintiff (driver Liu Hai): The rental department should return the remuneration.
Defendant (lessor): The lessor should not return the remuneration.
Who will pay for the loss of 55,000 yuan? Nanshan Construction Engineering Company signed a construction contract to build the commercial building of Binjiang Real Estate Development Company, and Binjiang Company entrusted a survey and design unit to survey and design the project according to the planning requirements. Nanshan Company carried out the construction according to the design report and drawings. 50 meters away from the construction site is the workshop of Hongxing Printing Factory. Six months after the construction of Hongxing Printing Factory, it was found that the printing equipment in the workshop was displaced and could not be produced normally. Therefore, Nanshan Company was consulted, and it was identified by the local authoritative department that a large amount of groundwater was pumped during the construction of the genetic site where the workshop was located, and the foundation was not poured in strict accordance with the installation requirements when installing printing equipment. The loss of shutdown, repair and other expenses caused by the shift of equipment in the printing plant reached more than 50,000 yuan. Now Red Star Printing Factory sued Binjiang Company and demanded compensation for the above losses.
Debate: Should Binjiang Company be liable for compensation?
Plaintiff (Red Star Printing Factory): Binjiang Company shall be liable for compensation.
Defendant (Binjiang Company): Binjiang Company is not liable for compensation.