征信的法理研究

【作者】 叶世清；

【导师】 卢代富；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 经济法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 征信体系建设是社会信用体系建设的关键和核心。尽管征信活动已经成为社会经济生活中的一个事实,它得到了社会学、经济学、管理学等学科理论的支持,但是,征信产业的发展并非一帆风顺,从其产生的那天起,征信就不断受到各种挑战和质疑。为了使我国的社会信用体系建设有准备地、顺利地走向未来,我们还必须作艰苦的分析工作、认真的对话、甚至相当大的妥协。本文以征信法律关系的构成要素和运动过程为脉络,围绕征信活动中信用信息的法律保护与信息共享这一主题,将征信置于社会信用体系建设背景之下,并结合国内外的征信实践,研究我国征信活动的规范化、法制化原理,以消除人们对于征信的疑虑,促进信息的自由流动和信息共享,实现政府对征信市场的有效监管,促使市场主体关注自身信用、避免失信行为。除了导论和一个简短的结论外,全文共分五章。导论部分主要是说明本文选题的背景和意义、相关领域国内外研究现状、本文的创新点、研究方法与研究思路等。促成本文选题的动机有三:一是由于我国社会经济生活中出现了信任危机,要求对市场主体进行信用调查并对失信者予以惩戒的呼声日盛;二是不少人对征信机构采集、处理和披露消费者信用信息或者企业信用信息的行为产生了顾虑,担心征信活动会危及个人隐私和商业秘密;三是信息在社会经济生活中的特殊价值,在信息社会里,信息已经成为最有价值的资源之一。从国内外相关研究文献来看,关于社会信任的根源、信息社会的特点以及数据信息的保护等方面的研究成果和立法成果是相当丰富的,学者们注意到了社会经济生活和文化传统对于信任的影响,并认为对于个人信息应着力于提供法律“保护”,对于政府行政等公共信息则应强调“公开”和共享,而企业信息主要是从商业秘密的角度加以保护。在研究方法上,主要采用了哲学的矛盾分析法、法学的权利义务分析法、经济学的“成本—效益”分析法以及社会学的实地调查方法等。第一章“征信的多维解读”主要是阐明征信、信用、信任、信息、信用信息等概念的含义,并从社会学、经济学、管理学等角度审视征信在社会经济生活中的意义。征信在很大程度上是社会分工和信用交易的伴生品。分工产生了交换,但交换离不开信任,信任可以获取信用,信任的建立则依赖于制度和信息。征信机构通过各种手段收集消费者个人和企业的信用信息,然后对这些信息进行分类和筛选处理,并依据一定的标准进行分析判断,以评估、验证调查对象的信用状况的社会中介服务活动,是为“征信”。而“信用”虽然可以在道德、经济和法律三个层面上使用,但它更多地与经济生活联系在一起。信息是指事物运动的状态与方式,是物质的一种属性。信息具有三大基本功能,即传播功能、组织功能和促进功能。征信活动的客体是信用信息。根据数据主体的不同,征信可以分为个人征信和企业征信。社会学、经济学和管理学的理论实际上说明,征信在建立社会信任、减少交易风险、改善企业管理等方面具有独特的价值和功能。至于征信的合法性,可以通过征信产生与发展的历史必然性、征信目的的正当性与征信结果的效益性、关于权利让渡的契约理论等加以证明。第二章“征信机构的法律地位及模式”是对主体,尤其是征信机构的法律地位,以及征信机构模式的研究。社会经济发展的现实需要促使立法对团体的法律人格予以确认和规范。在法律性质上,将征信机构视为企业法人或政府机构等都具有较大的弊端,而将其视为社会中介服务机构更具合理性。征信机构是征信法律关系中最核心的主体和矛盾的焦点,征信机构与信用信息的提供者、信息用户之间主要是基于契约形成的合同法律关系,而征信机构与数据主体之间的法律关系则比较微妙,主要是隐私权和商业秘密权保护法律关系,征信机构应当尊重数据主体的知情权,不得侵犯数据主体的隐私和商业秘密。在征信机构的设立模式上,主要包括美国的市场化民营化的信用局模式、欧盟的公共征信机构模式和日本的会员制模式三种。考虑到我国的征信现状,我国的征信体系建设宜选择“多元、多层次”的征信模式,并最终走向民营化。第三章“征信中信用信息的法律保护与共享”是对客体,即信用信息之上的权利冲突的法律研究。信用信息这一法律客体之上承载着财产、人格、国家安全、政治参与等不同性质的利益。在征信活动中,不同的主体对于信用信息有着不同的利益诉求,表现在法律上就是权利的冲突。数据主体竭力主张对于信息的控制权,以保护个人的隐私和企业的商业秘密。而征信机构、信息提供者、信息用户等却主张,为了社会成员能够充分利用信息资源,维护社会公共利益和市场秩序,保证信息民主,应当实现信息自由流动与信息共享。征信活动的数据来源很大部分出自政府部门,但是在部门利益的驱使下,却形成了信息独占、信息封锁和信息垄断,即“信息瓶颈”问题。为了对信用信息共享与保护数据主体的信息控制权加以更好的平衡,应当坚持四项基本法律原则,即利益平衡原则、区别保护原则、知情同意原则、合理与谨慎原则。第四章“征信行为的法律研究”主要是从行为的角度分析和论证征信活动应当遵循的法律规则。征信机构无论是采集数据主体的信用信息,还是处理、评估或者披露信用信息,都应当尽到合理的注意义务,尊重数据主体的相应权利。征信机构应当通过正当的渠道和方式采集信用信息,其既可以向数据主体直接采集信息,也可以向掌握数据主体信用信息的公共管理部门、其他单位和个人采集。在采集范围上,对于正面信息和负面信息应全面采集,并顾及到法律对个人隐私和企业商业秘密的保护。在处理信用信息时,必须尊重和维护数据主体的信用权利,尤其是在对数据主体的信用状况作出信用报告或进行信用评级时,为了保证征信产品的质量,应坚持完整性、准确性、有效性等标准,否则,征信机构将因为侵权而承担过错法律责任。征信机构在披露和传播信用信息时,也应当注意采取合理的方式,并对数据主体提出的信息查询、异议以及信用修复等正当要求作出积极的反应。第五章“政府信用管理与失信惩罚机制”主要研究政府与社会、社会与失信者之间的法律关系问题。在市场经济条件下,政府并非纯粹的社会“守夜人”和秩序的维护者,还是社会信用体系建设的重要参与者与推动者。征信监管是一个包括政府监管、行业自律以及舆论的监督和信息用户监督等相结合的体系。一个富有效率的社会信用体系离不开政府对信用交易和信用管理行业的监督和管理。考虑到我国社会信用体系建设的现状,可以通过立法授权由中央银行、工商、税务、海关、质监、商务等部门分别履行信用市场的监管职能,即构建一个多元化的信用市场监管体系。尽管传统法律对于惩罚失信者提出了质疑,但是,从维护社会公共利益和公共秩序的角度看,惩罚失信者是必要的。失信惩罚机制是一种融合了法律强制和社会自治特征的综合性防御应对体系,对失信者从经济上惩罚、道德上谴责甚至社会活动能力上予以限制,不是对失信者要一棒子打死,而是要达到惩罚与预防的双重目的。对于失信者的惩罚必须经过一定的法律程序,并将惩罚控制在合理的限度内。结论部分主要是对信用与法律、道德的关系的进一步分析,并对征信法的部门法归属进行分析阐述。信用问题不是一个单纯的道德问题、经济问题或者法律问题,社会信用体系的建立和运行是一个庞大的系统工程,只有当法律、道德、文化、经济等因素相互兼容、协调发展的时候,征信才能发挥出最大的经济效益和社会效益,我国的社会信用体系才能真正建立起来,并最终实现社会信任与和谐。从法律部门归属上看,将征信法置于经济法部门之下,有利于使征信法律制度与经济法的理念、原则、制度等实现更好的契合。更多还原

【Abstract】 Constructing credit investigation system is the core to build social credit system. Though credit investigation, which is already a fact in social economic life, has achieved support from theories on sociology, economics and management, the business of credit investigation does not develop smoothly. It is faced with some strong challenges and suspicions. To make our social credit system built under good preparation, we have to do more hard work on analysis, careful dialogue, and even relatively much compromise. This dissertation focuses on balancing the confrongting relationship between the legal protection for the rights of information and credit information sharing in credit investigation from jurisprudential perspective with a close eye on the operating process in credit investigation. By putting credit investigation within the context of building social credit system, and incorporating the practice on credit investigation in China and abroad, The dissertation analyzes the normalization in Chinese credit investigation and its legal principle so as to eliminate the people’s doubt on credit investigating, to realize the free conmmunication and sharing of information and the efficient supervision of government on credit investigation market, and to promote the market bodies concerning their credits and avoid credit-losing activities.This dissertation consists of five chapters besides an introduction and a short conclusion.The introduction mainly discusses the motives and aims for writing this dissertation, the research conditions in relative fields in China and abroad, the innovation and deficiencies of the dissertation, and the approaches and thought for this topic. For the credit crisis in China’s social economic life, it is called to carry out credit investigation on market bodies and punish the credit-losers, therefore the credit investigation occurs. At the same time, many people worry about the acts carried out by credit investigation agencies on collecting, dealing with and disclosing the consumers’ or enterprises’ credit information, worrying that the credit investigation may jeopardize personal privacy and commercial secret. In addition, information has been one of the most valuable resources in information society. There are rich materials in research and legislation on the root in social trust, the characteristics of information society and the protection of data information, which establishes a broad platform for the development of this dissertation. The jurisprudential analysis is a response to these concepts and legislation achievements, which may act as a target for attack.ChapterⅠis the understanding on credit investigation from multi-perspectives, which mainly focuses on implications of credit investigation and corresponding concepts, such as credit, trust, information and credit information, and the significance of credit investigation in social economic life from perspectives on sociology, economics and management. Credit investigation to a large extent is a company of social division and credit trade. Social division creates exchange, but exchange could not go without trust, while the establishment of credit could gain trust. Credit investigation refers to a kind of service activities that the credit investigation agencies collect the consumers’ and the enterprises’ credit information by all kinds of means, sort and select the information, and evaluate and validate the credit of the target in accordance with certain standards. Though credit could be applied in three levels, moral, economic and legal, it relates to economic life more. Credit is a capability to gain commodity, service or currency without paying cash on the basis of trusting the promise from the debt payer to pay the creditor. Nevertheless, information refers to a state and form for things to move as an attribute of materials. There are three basic functions for information, that is, transmission, organization, and promotion. The object for credit investigation is credit information. Credit investigation consists of consumers’ credit investigation and enterprises’ credit investigation for their subjects. Theories on sociology, economics and management can prove that credit investigation does have special value and function on establishing social trust, reducing trade risk and improving enterprises’ management. The historical necessity of credit investigation, the rightness for the purposes of credit investigation, and the benefit from the credit investigation, and the contract theory on rights de-misability all prove the legitimacy for credit investigation.ChapterⅡis the legal status for agencies on credit investigation and its establishing mode, which focuses on the legal subjects, esp. agencies on credit investigation, and the establishing mode on establishing agencies on credit investigation. The reality on social economic development urges the confirmation and regulation on the legal personality on groups from legislation. It is more reasonable to regard agencies on credit investigation as social service agencies than regarding it as enterprises or government agencies from legal nature. Agencies on credit investigation are the core subjects and the core of contradiction. The legal relationship between agencies on credit investigation, the suppliers of credit information, and the information consumers is formed in accordance with contracts. The relationship between agencies on credit investigation and data subjects is very subtle, and agencies on credit investigation should respect the right to learn the truth from the data subjects without violating their privacy and commercial secrets. The mode to carry out credit investigation abroad mainly consists of the market operated credit bureau mode in US, pubic credit investigation agencies mode in EU, and the membership mode in Japan. Based on Chinese practice on credit investigation, China should follow the credit investigation mode involving multi bodes and levels, and the way that China’s credit investigation system should go in the future is private-oriented.ChapterⅢis about the legal protection of credit information and the information sharing in credit investigation’s legal relation, which focuses on the rights and interest in credit information from legal relationship perspective. Credit information as legal subject is a combination of different interests on property, personality, state security and political involvement. In credit investigation, different bodies have different interests’ appeals represented by rights contradiction. Data bodies try to pursue the. control on information to protect individual privacy and enterprises’ commercial secrets. While credit investigation agencies, information suppliers and information consumers try to hold that information should flow freely and be shared by society to secure the social bodies consuming information resources, to maintain social public interests and market order for the aim of information democracy. The data on credit investigation manly comes from government agencies, which may cause information bottleneck because these agencies may form information monopoly for their own interests. To balance the sharing on credit information and protection on date bodies information control, we should insist on the following principles: principle of balanced interests, differential protection principle, principle of informed consent, principle of rationality and caution.ChapterⅣis legal research on credit investigation behavior, which mainly analyzes and explains the legal principles followed by credit investigation behavior from behavior perspective. Credit investigation agencies may collect credit information through due channels, which may be carried out from the data bodies directly or from public administration department, other units or persons. The negative and active credit information should be collected fully with some concern on the protection of individual privacy and the enterprises’ commercial secrets. In dealing with credit information, we have to respect and protect the data bodies’ right on credits, esp. when presenting the data bodies’ credits report or evaluating the credit level. To guarantee the quality of credit products, we should insist on the standards of integrity, correctness, and effectiveness, otherwise, the credit investigation agencies should assume tort liability. When disclosing credit information, the credit investigation agencies should take reasonable means to take active response on the right requirement from the data bodies such as the information inquiry, objection and credit remedy.ChapterⅤfocuses on the relationship between government and society, the society and credit-losers. Under market conditions, the government is not only a pure night watcher and an order protector, but also an important participator and propellant to build social credit system. Supervision on credit investigation is a combined system involving government supervision, self-discipline from the trade, supervision from the press, and supervision form the consumers. Considering the current conditions for Chinese social credit system building, we may authorize departments on central bank, business administration, tax administration, customs, quality supervision and commerce by legislation to perform the supervision function on credit market. Though the traditional law doubt on punishing the credit-losers, it is necessary to punish credit-losers to maintain the social public interests and public order. Credit-losers’ punishment mechanism is a comprehensive protection system combined legal obligations and social autonomy. The punishment on credit-losers focuses on economic, moral even social activities fields to achieve punishing and precautionary aims. The punishment on credit-losers is to be carried out after certain legal procedures within reasonable limits.The conclusion further analyzes the relationship between credit, and law and moral, and discusses the attribution of law on credit investigation. Credit is not a pure moral, economic or legal issue but a large systematic project. When legal, moral, cultural, economic factors could co-ordinate and develop well, the credit investigation system could play its largest economic interests and social interests, and only under these conditions Chinese social credit system could be built eventually to reach social trust and harmony. It is reasonable to put law on credit investigation as part of economic law.更多还原