【摘要】：近年來，中國企業(yè)頻繁違反法規(guī)，其中最引人注目的是“三鹿奶粉事件”。為何企業(yè)違法事件屢屢發(fā)生，筆者認(rèn)為監(jiān)察制度沒有發(fā)揮應(yīng)有的作用是一個(gè)很重要的原因。 全世界典型的股份有限公司監(jiān)查體制分為兩種，一種是英美法系的一元模式，另一種是大陸法系的二元模式。日本原本屬于大陸法系的二元模式，平成14年（2002年），日本引入了來源于英美法系的委員會設(shè)置公司。由此，日本的股份有限公司可以采用兩種監(jiān)查體制中的任意一種。既可以選擇保持原來的監(jiān)事會設(shè)置公司不變，也可以選擇轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)槲瘑T會設(shè)置公司。 將監(jiān)事會設(shè)置公司和委員會設(shè)置公司進(jìn)行比較，可以發(fā)現(xiàn)兩者各有優(yōu)劣。在人事權(quán)和報(bào)酬方面，委員會設(shè)置公司更加先進(jìn)。但是在獨(dú)任制、獨(dú)立性等方面，委員會設(shè)置公司的監(jiān)查委員比不上監(jiān)事會設(shè)置公司的監(jiān)事。 根據(jù)調(diào)查，轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)槲瘑T會設(shè)置公司的公司數(shù)量很少，但是有一些公司采用了監(jiān)事會和獨(dú)立董事并設(shè)這種革新的形式。筆者認(rèn)為這種形式發(fā)揚(yáng)了委員會設(shè)置公司和監(jiān)事會設(shè)置公司的長處，避免了兩者的短處。 中國根據(jù)2005年的公司法修改，強(qiáng)制性要求上市公司必須同時(shí)設(shè)立獨(dú)立董事和監(jiān)事會。而且，在董事會的下面還要設(shè)立監(jiān)查委員會。于是，產(chǎn)生了監(jiān)事會和監(jiān)查委員會職權(quán)重復(fù)的問題。為了解決這一問題，筆者認(rèn)為可以借鑒日本的監(jiān)事會和獨(dú)立董事并設(shè)公司的模式，，在董事會下面不設(shè)監(jiān)查委員會，讓監(jiān)事會發(fā)揮監(jiān)查的作用。 許多中國學(xué)者指出中國的監(jiān)事會不起作用。為了讓監(jiān)事會更好地發(fā)揮監(jiān)查機(jī)能，就必須解決獨(dú)立性缺乏、法律制度不完備的問題。為此，筆者認(rèn)為可以引入獨(dú)立監(jiān)事，提高監(jiān)事會的獨(dú)立性，并且充實(shí)監(jiān)事的法律制度。
[Abstract]:In recent years, Chinese companies have frequently violated the law, most notably Sanlu milk powder incident. The author thinks that the supervision system does not play its due role is a very important reason why the enterprises break the law frequently. There are two typical supervision systems of joint stock limited companies in the world, one is the unitary mode of Anglo-American law system, the other is the dualistic mode of civil law system. Japan originally belonged to the dualistic mode of civil law system, which was formed for 14 years (2002), and introduced the commission setting up company from the common law system. As a result, Japanese companies can use either of two systems of surveillance. Either the original board of supervisors set up the company or the committee set up the company. By comparing the board of supervisors setting up company with the committee setting up company, we can find that the two have their own advantages and disadvantages. In terms of personal rights and remuneration, the Commission set up companies more advanced. However, in the aspect of sole-appointment and independence, the supervisory members of the committee setting up a company can not match the supervisors of the board of supervisors. According to the survey, a small number of companies have turned into committees, but some have adopted the innovative form of board of supervisors and independent directors. The author believes that this form develops the advantages of the committee setting up company and the supervisory board setting company, and avoids the disadvantages of both. According to the 2005 company law amendment, listed companies must set up independent directors and supervisory boards. In addition, there is also a supervisory committee under the board of directors. As a result, the board of supervisors and the issue of duplication of powers. In order to solve this problem, I think we can learn from the model of the board of supervisors and independent directors in Japan and set up a company, and do not set up a supervisory committee under the board of directors, and let the board of supervisors play the role of supervision and inspection. Many Chinese scholars point out that China's supervisory board does not work. In order to make the board of supervisors better exert the function of supervision, we must solve the problem of lack of independence and incomplete legal system. Therefore, I think we can introduce independent supervisors, improve the independence of the board of supervisors, and enrich the legal system of supervisors.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海外國語大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.291.91;F276.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 鐘志勇;;中日監(jiān)事規(guī)則比較研究[J];廈門大學(xué)法律評論;2004年02期

2 季麗曄;;日本外部監(jiān)事獨(dú)立性芻議[J];法制與社會;2011年10期

3 韓瑾;柯大鋼;;新視角看獨(dú)立董事制度及與監(jiān)事會制度的融合[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究導(dǎo)刊;2007年02期

4 盧以品;中國上市公司引入獨(dú)立董事制度之必要性分析[J];學(xué)術(shù)論壇;2002年01期

本文編號：2229821