【作者】 阎锐；

【导师】 沈国明；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 法律史， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 现代立法过程一般都是在诸多主体的合力作用下运行的，是议会、政府、政党、社会公众等正式的和非正式的机关，以立法机关为中心围绕立法进行运动和产生作用的总过程。在我国，从实际情况看，除了地方人大及其常委会（以下简称地方人大），诸多主体参与并影响地方性法规的形成过程。作为法定的立法机关，地方人大应当在立法过程中发挥主要的、导向性的功能，行使实际权力，成为事实上的立法机关，而不应当仅仅成为法律上的立法机关，甚至“橡皮图章”。为此，本文试图围绕地方人大在立法过程中的主导功能这个命题，以上海市30多年来地方立法实践为例，以地方立法过程中各种参与主体的角色互动为场域，以地方立法连续的、动态的过程为观察点，从现实立法活动的经验事实和实证材料中考察、总结和归纳地方人大在立法过程中现有功能的实际图景；在此基础上，对地方人大作为法定立法主体，面对现实与应然的差距，应当采取何种现实而又有效的措施强化其主导功能，提出若干建议。论文除导论、结语外，共分六章：第一章对地方人大立法权的理论基础与制度嬗变进行研究。以国内外现有理论研究、历史资料以及法律规定为依据，对中西方立法权配置的思想基础、西方立法权配置的基本模式以及我国人民代表大会制度下立法权配置的模式进行回顾，进而对我国地方人大获得制定地方性法规权力的流变进行梳理。同时，本章还对中国现行立法体制下省级人大及其常委会制定地方性法规的法律地位和权力特点进行归纳，在此基础上对地方人大主导地方立法过程进行“应然”分析，指出地方人大主导地方立法过程不仅由当代中国人民当家作主的国家性质所决定，也是中国立法体制长期探索发展的结果，且为宪法所确认。第二章对参与地方立法过程的主体及其组织结构作了分析。从实际情况看，参与地方立法过程的主体，既包括作为法定立法主体的地方人大，也包括现阶段对地方立法有不同程度影响的地方党委、地方政府以及社会公众。本章首先对地方人民代表大会及其作为它的常设机构的常务委员会的组织结构作了分析，以地方人大专门委员会、尤其是承担统一审议职能的法制委员会、立法综合机构法制工作委员会、作为常委会领导机构的主任会议以及人民代表大会代表、常务委员会委员、工作人员为对象，研究了这些主体的设立背景以及各自在地方立法过程中的角色定位。其次，本章对参与地方立法过程的地方党委、地方政府、司法机关、上一级人大及其常委会、下一级人大及其常委会以及社会公众各自在地方立法过程的法定角色作了分析。第三章对当代中国地方立法准备阶段地方人大的功能表现现状进行分析。以上海市地方立法过程为例，详细分析了地方立法规划编制、立法计划编制、法规草案起草各个环节中地方人大的主导功能。从现状看，虽然地方立法立项本身是地方人大主导地方立法“入口关”的载体，地方人大在实践中主导着立项的启动、建议项目的筛选等工作，但最终进入立项的项目八成为政府提议立法的项目，且进入立项的项目内容上大多与同时期地方党委的工作重点存在“暗合”现象，反映出政府在政策议题形成上占据优势，而地方立法坚持“围绕中心、服务大局”的指导思想，在一定程度上也折射出现阶段地方立法工具主义的理念。关于地方立法起草，实证统计表明，大多数法案由地方政府主管部门负责起草，这在一定意义上是当前立法“部门利益化”的根源所在；而地方人大有关委员会等起草的法规多局限于地方人大权力行使规范（如议事规则、任免国家机关工作人员办法）以及人大代表履职规范，对经济、社会、文化、生态等领域，较少独立起草或者牵头组织，反映出地方政府由于实际管理社会生活，且对社会公共资源有较大的控制权，因此在政策方案形成上占据强势地位。第四章分析了当代中国地方立法法案到法阶段地方人大的主导功能现状。法案到法阶段，是立法过程中利益表达、利益综合最为集中的阶段，实践中地方人大以及其他参与主体对这一阶段最为重视。本章分提案、审议、表决、公布四个环节对地方人大以及其他参与主体的角色表现及其功能体现作了分析。从上海的情况看，虽然向地方人大提出法案的法定主体较多，但政府提出的立法议案比例占到绝大多数，出现“行政垄断提案”的现象，而其他主体的立法提案权长期虚置；地方人大对政府提出的法案多顺利将其列入会议议程，相比之下，30多年来，市人大代表向代表大会提出6000多件议案，其中不乏立法议案，却无一进入立法程序。实证研究还表明，地方人大对法规草案约70%条文提出审议意见，对约35%条文作出修改，虽然最终进入地方人大表决议程的法规案，均顺利表决通过，但地方人大对法案的实质性修改呈逐渐加强的趋势。在法案到法阶段，地方党委几乎很少介入、支配这一阶段的立法过程，但人大党组实际上起到了对关键性问题“把关”的作用。此外，地方人大近年来在民主立法上不断创新形式，社会公众在这一阶段的参与最为活跃，但其对立法的实质性影响较小，这与地方人大对其参与的重视程度呈正相关关系。第五章分析当代中国地方立法完善阶段地方人大主导功能的表现。催生当代中国地方立法解释、评估、修改、废止、清理的根本动因是社会本身的需求，但从实际表现看，地方人大在这样一个“政治反馈”过程的各个环节，其功能表现不尽相同。地方人大对法规是否修改或废止、何时对其修改或者废止、对哪些问题进行修改方面的反应并不及时，启动法规修改或废止的主动权实际上掌握在地方政府手中。但对于法规清理，地方人大多根据中央的部署，既主导法规清理的启动，也主导法规清理的标准和工作步骤。法规解释是使法规条文更好适用于社会实际的立法完善手段，实证统计表明，地方人大极少运用正式的立法解释权，常委会法工委对有关部门提出询问所做的答复往往成为立法解释的替代形式，而对实践中时有发生的政府主管部门对法规的扩张解释，地方人大尚未建立有效的监督机制。此外，本研究发现，在地方性法规出台后，地方政府及其主管部门往往出台多件法规配套实施性文件，这种细化性实施规范虽然起到了使法规更易于操作的作用，但其将地方性法规在法律适用中“化解于无形”的负面影响值得关注。第六章重点阐述强化地方人大在立法过程中主导功能的建议。经过之前章节的分析，尤其是立法过程三个阶段的实证分析，本章提出，地方人大主导立法过程既是其法定职责，也是我国人民当家做主国家性质的体现，因此，应当针对实践中出现的问题，通过完善地方人大组织结构、议事方式等，不断强化地方人大在地方立法过程中的主导功能。本文据此提出建立公众参与的开放式的立项机制、地方人大组织牵头的多元化立法起草机制、人大代表议案转化推动机制、激活立法程序中的“过滤”机制、建立立法审议辩论机制以及公开机制、建立立法听证常态化机制、建立法规实施与立法完善互动机制、建立配套文件备案监督机制、建立人大组成人员专职化机制、建立立法参谋班子职业化机制等多项建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 Legislation in modern times is a process with the joint force of variousstakeholders. Formal and informal institutes like government, political parties andpublic operate and interact with each other for the purpose of legislation with congressas the center of the process. In China, local Congress and its standing committee havethe statutory authority to make local regulations, while from actual operationalperspective, other stakeholders apart from Congress take part in and affect theformation of regulation. As the statutory authority, the local Congress shall take theleading and guidance role in the legislation process, exert actual power, and be a reallegislative body rather than “making regulations of those having been made”or a“rubber chop”or a paper legislator. This article intends to analysize the leading functionof local congress by using the30years practice of Shanghai local Congress. Itanalysizes the interaction of relevant legislative participants, oberves the continous anddynamic legislative process, and study the actual functions the local Congress exertsusing empirical experience and real cases. Based on that, several suggestions are raisedto address the gap between reality and the law on Congress’statutory role of locallegislation, how to reinforce the leading role of Congress by taking practical andeffective measures.This arbicle consists of6chapters in addition to the introduction and theconclustion.Chapter1is on the development history of statuory legislative functions for localCongress. It reviews the theorical basis of legislative authority in China and westerncournties and the allocation model of this authority. Then it goes through the development process where local Congress and its standing committee obtained theauthority of make legislations. Meanwhile, this chapter tries to summarize the legalstatus and characters of provincial level Congress and its standing committee in currentlegislative system of China. It analysizes what “leading role” Congress should play inthe process of local legislation, pointing out this leading role is not only decided by thecurrent “people decides” but also the result of Chinese legislation practice which hasbeen confirmed by the Constitution.Chapter2is on the statutory role and organization structure of relevantstakeholders in participating local legislation. In practice, participants in a locallegislation includes Congress and its standing committee, the local CP, government, andthe public. Firstly, this chapter analysizes the organizational structure of local Congressand its committee, including special commissions and in particular the legislativecommission who is authorized to conduct the comprehensive review, the legal affairscommittee for daily legislative work, the chairperson meeting for decision making,congressmen, standing committee members and working staff, reaching why thesebodies are established and their roles in the local legislation. Secondly, this chapteranalysizes the statutory roles of local CP, authority, judicial body, congresses in higherand lower levels and the public in the process of local legislation.Chater3analysizes the function of congress in the preparation stage of a locallegislation. By studying the practice of Shanghai, it discusses the leading role ofCongress in making legislation5year plan, annual plan, and draft. Though Congress isresponsible for reviewing the feasibility of a legislative project, and it do in practicelead the start and review process, the projects passing through the review are mainlydrafted by the government at80%. The rest20%are drafted by other parties who havethe statutory suggestion right. Furthermore, most of the draft passing through thereview are the same as the working focus of local CP, which reflects a principle ofcurrent practice that legislation decision goes with the reform decision. On draft oflegislation, most of them are made by local government and this is part of the reasonscausing “legislation departmentization”. The drafts made by Congress are limited tolocal Congress’s work on legislation, monitoring, appointment, decision rights on important matters, and how congressmen carry out their obligations. It is seldom thatthe legislations on economy, socialty, culture and biology are made by Congressindependently or taking a lead. This reflects the fact that local government has a controlover the public resoures due to actual management of social life, and therefore takes astrong potion in policy making process.Chapter4is on Congress’s leading function in current legislative process fromdraft to law. From draft to law is the process that various interests are to express and forconsideration, and therefore is the most important stage in a legislative process. Thischapter reviews the4steps therein (proposal, review, vote and promulgation) toanalysize the funcations of congress and other participants. From the Shanghai casestudy, though many institutes are authorized to propose draft regulation, but thelegislative drafting are dominated by the local government. The drafts made bygovernment were usually reviewed by Congress while6,000proposal made bycongressmen were never entered into the legislative process in the past30years. Fromthe statistics, Congress commented on70%of the draft regulation, and revised on35%of the draft. Though every draft entering into the voting process was finally passed thevoting, there is a trend that Congress will conduct a substantial review of the draftregulation. From draft to law, the local PC does not involve in the legislation directlybut still plays a key role on critical issues. Local congress is trying to create new waysto promote legislation democracy, and public participation is active in recent years.However, the impact of public is passive and subject to the Congress’ intention ofpublic participation.Chapter5is on the role of Congress in optimization of local legislation. Thefoundamental reason of legislative interpretation, assessment, revisions and revocationof local regulations are a demand of society. In practice, Congress’ functions aredifferent in different stages of such “political feedback” process. Congress’ reaction towhether local regulations need revision or revocation, when to do that and on whichissues is not timely. It is the government who control the process of regulation revisionsor revocation. For the regulation audit, the local congress follows the central congress’sinstruction on the start of work, the standards and the process. The legislative interpretation is to ensure the local regulation better fit the social reality. The Congressat local levels seldom exerts the interpretation rights formally. The legal affairscommission’s reply to quaries is an alternative. For the extended interpretation made bythe execution authority, Congress does not have effective system to monitor. In addition,after local regulation is made, the government usually makes supplementary ruleswhose numbers are several times compared with local regulations. Such supplementcan improve the regulation by providing detail guidance. On the other hand, it alsodamage the right of Congress on local legislation.Chapter6is on the reinforcement of Congress in local legislation. It is suggested the leadingrole of Congress is a statutory obligations and represents the people decides nature of this country.The leading roles should be reinforced by improving the structural organzaiton, discussion rules ofCongress. This chapter suggests a public participation system to review the regulation proposal, adiverse drafting system led by Congress, promotion of congressmen’s proposal on regulation, a filtermachenism in legislation, debate in legislative discussion, regular legislative hearing process, postlegislation assessment, supplementary rules review system, professionalism of legislative staff, etc.更多还原