论我国经济法的司法救济

【作者】 吴荻枫；

【导师】 顾培东；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 经济法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 自中国经济法诞生以来,围绕经济法诉讼的形态、意义和独立性的争议就一刻未曾停息,实践中也几经起落变迁。但无论分歧大小,经济法实体权利需要相应的司法救济程序是不争的事实。目前,我国司法实践中存在诸多的不可诉现象,大量的经济法规则并未成为司法裁判的依据。同时,与经济法诉讼相关的理论也存在众多悬而未决的难题,如经济法是否存在独立的责任制度,经济法是否具有可诉性,是否有必要建立独立的经济法诉讼程序,经济法诉权的特点与理论基础,经济法诉讼区别于民事诉讼的特性,近年来学界热议的公益诉讼与经济法诉讼的关系,等等。本文旨在分析我国经济法诉讼现状和特性的基础上,就理论变革和制度建构两方面对上诉问题作一初步解答,全文由六章构成:第一章——我国经济法司法的缺失及其成因。本文基于从问题出发的角度,第一章中先简要回顾了中国经济法司法的历史沿革与现实状况,指出了目前经济法司法救济制度在立法上和实践中所存在的突出的问题,详细分析了其成因。外部因素和内部因素复杂的共同作用形成了经济法纠纷接近司法的障碍。外部因素包括国家权力行使的方式的限制、立法指导思想的制约、司法功能特性与实践做法的局限、经济诉讼历史变迁造成误区、诉讼理论和学术偏好的影响等。内部因素则与经济法本身的特性相关,如经济法泛法化现象、经济法权利的不确定性和经济法责任制度的缺失等。第二章——我国经济法司法救济的必要性和可行性。本章首先分析了经济法司法救济的重要意义,其在于保障权利的实现、规范权力的行使、促使责任的承担、强化国家对社会的控制、维护公共利益与社会伦理,推动经济法理论体系的完善等。此后,本章归纳了经济法纠纷的几种类型,分析了经济法纠纷的特性,指出其与传统民事诉讼的关键不同点:当事人地位的形式平等而实质不平等。针对经济法纠纷的特点,文章提出了完善我国经济法司法救济的方案,从理论变革和制度建构两方面入手。理论上,首先需要明确经济法的可诉性,针对宏观调控法的可诉性的争议,文章具体论证了宏观调控法的可诉性。其次,基于经济法纠纷的特性,应革新传统的诉权理论。制度上,在简要分析现有的与经济法诉讼相关的主要学说的优缺点后,结合我国司法资源的现状,提出了改革现有的诉讼法同时设立经济法特别司法程序以适应解决经济法纠纷的需要的思路。第三章——经济法诉权。经济法诉权问题关系到经济法司法救济的启动,是解决经济法诉讼问题的核心。经济法诉讼往往涉及到扩散利益的保护,客观上要求诉权的扩张,而这与传统的诉权理论产生了尖锐的冲突,诉权的行使方式亦和传统诉权相异。本章从传统诉权的理论出发,以法学和经济学相结合的方式,特别针对经济法和经济法诉权的外部性问题,以成本-收益方法,讨论了经济法诉权适度扩张的必要性、可能性及其限制,为构建具体的经济法诉讼制度奠定基础。第四章——我国经济法司法救济制度框架。经济法司法救济合理的制度模式可建立在改革目前三大诉讼制度并设置经济法特别诉讼程序的基础之上,但经济法特别诉讼程序并不等于经济法公益诉讼,公益诉讼仅是其中的一个重要部分。本章分别分析了现有民事诉讼和行政诉讼对解决经济法纠纷的局限,提出了变革建议。改革民事诉讼的核心在于实现对小额多数权利的救济,重点是完善小额诉讼程序和群体诉讼程序;改革行政诉讼的核心在于制约国家干预经济的权力,防止权力滥用,尤其是对无直接相对人的非具体行政行为的进行监督,重点是扩大行政诉讼的受案范围,放宽原告的资格和贯彻行政赔偿责任等。本章最后探讨了以经济法公益诉讼为主的经济法特别司法程序的利弊和可行性。第五章——经济法特别司法程序总论。本章具体研究经济法特别司法程序的建构。首先,提出了经济法特别司法程序的两大原则,平衡与效率。其次,主要以经济法公益纠纷为例,并结合其他经济法私益纠纷的特点,研究经济法特别司法程序的受案范围、管辖、当事人、证据制度、诉讼费用、审判机构、法律责任和法官的自由裁量权等具体问题。第六章——典型经济法纠纷与司法程序专题。实务中,因经济法本身的特性,涉经济法纠纷也存在多种复杂的形态,而很难适用一种统一的司法程序,甚至需要运用多种司法程序综合处理。因此,本章中选取了几类在中国目前具有代表性的经济法纠纷,分专题探讨如何改革现有的司法程序以适应解决这些纠纷的需要,主要研究了财产征用、环境污染、国有资产保护、政府采购和反垄断等几类典型的经济法纠纷的司法救济程序。更多还原

【Abstract】 Ever since the economic law was born in China, disputes surrounding the forms, significance and independence of the economic law have never stopped. It has been modified several times in judicial practice. However, in spite of the dispute, a set of judicial remedy proceedings is required to match substantive rights of the economic law, because many cases are currently impractical in litigation in our country and most rules of the economic law have been hard to refer to in practical judicial judgment. At the same time many problems exist in theories related to the economic law: whether an independent responsibility and the litigable are attached to the economic law; whether it is necessary to establish a set of independent litigation system of the economic law; what are the characteristics and theoretical base of the litigant right; what is the differences between the economic litigation and the civil litigation, and what is the relation between the public interest action and the economic litigation. Based on a research of current situation and characteristics of economic law in our country and integrating the study of law and economics, the thesis explores into the economic litigant right and gives some solutions to the above question. It attempts to construct a judicial remedy system for economic law under the existing judicial system. It consists of six chapters:Chapter 1 is entitled by deficiency with the economic law litigation and its causes. This chapter reviews the development history and current situation of the economic law in our country. The main problems with the legislation and the implementation of the judicial remedy system of the economic law are noted and the causes are analyzed. The external and internal factors combine to hamper its access to justice. The external factors include restriction and limitation of administrative enforcement, restriction of guiding principle of legislation, restraints of jurisdiction and the judicial practice, gray area caused by variation of economic litigation, influence of litigant theory and academic preference. The internal factors are more concerned with the characteristics of the economic law, such as generalization of economic law, uncertainty of economic rights and the default of an economic responsibility system.Chapter 2 is entitled by necessity and practicality of the establishment of judicial remedy system of the economic law in our country. In the chapter the significance of establishing a judicial remedy system is dealt with firstly: it will be instituted to secure the legal rights, standardize administrative enforcement, define responsibilities, strengthen the authority of the state over the society, safeguard public interest and maintain social ethics and help to perfect theoretic system of the economic law. And, economic disputes are discussed in the chapter. Characteristics of economic disputes are analyzed and its differences with the civil litigation are pointed out: the parties are on an equal standing rather formally than substantively, which results in procedures quite different from the traditional way. Based on this the article comes up with some ways for the solution, starting with reform of the theoretic base and the restructuring of the system. In theory, litigant possibility of the economic law, especially the macro-control law, should be re-defined, and traditional theory about litigant right should be reformed. In system, after the analysis of the advantages and drawbacks of major doctrines on economic litigation, reform of the existing procedure law and establishment of a special judicial procedure of economic law to solve economic disputes are put forward.Chapter 3 is entitled by economic litigant right. The economic litigant right has a crucial role in the realization of judicial remedy system of economic law. It is central to solving of problems brought about by economic litigation. Economic litigation requires expansion of litigant right objectively, a fact that runs counter to the traditional theory on litigant right. Based on the traditional litigant right and combining the law with the economics, and with a special view to tackle the external problems of economic law and economic litigant right, necessity and the restriction in practice of the expansion of economic litigant right in the process of institution of a specific economic litigation system is discussed.Chapter 4 is entitled by frame of judicial remedy system of economic law. A rational judicial remedy system of economic law is based on reform of the existing three litigation procedure and establishment of special judicial procedures of economic law. However, the special judicial procedures of economic law differ from the public economic interest action in that the public interest action is only a part of it. In this chapter limits of application of civil litigation and the administration litigation in settlement of economic disputes are discussed and reform proposals are put forward. Central for reform of the civil litigation is the realization of aids in right granted to the majority of people. The reform of administration litigation lies in tightening of supervision of state intervened economy. In the end of the chapter the special economic litigation system featuring public economic interest action is discussed.Chapter 5 is entitled by overview of special judicial procedure of economic law. Structure of the special judicial procedure of economic law is set out. Two principles of equilibrium and efficiency for construction of the special procedure are introduced, and public economic disputes and personal economic disputes are illustrated in the discussion of matters related to the special judicial procedure of economic law, such as scope of accepting cases, jurisdiction, parties, evidence system, litigation fee, tribunals, legal responsibilities and judge’s discretion.Chapter 6 is entitled by typical economic disputes and the judicial procedures. Due to its special features, economic related disputes vary greatly and a uniform judicial system is hardly applicable when weighing these disputes. A comprehensive system of judicial procedure is thus required. In the chapter several economic disputes typical in the country are discussed in the exploration into the necessity to reform the current judicial system. Judicial remedy proceedings, such as in expropriation, environmental pollution, protection of state owned assets, government procurement and antimonopoly are discussed.更多还原