本文選題：官員 + 信息公開　； 參考：《蘇州大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著對(duì)官員信息規(guī)制的不斷完善、政府信息公開的發(fā)展，社會(huì)上對(duì)于官員信息公開的呼聲也愈發(fā)高漲。與此相對(duì)，我國(guó)有關(guān)官員信息公的范圍的規(guī)定尚未完善，，實(shí)踐中也出現(xiàn)了令出不行、拒絕公開的情況。在這一背景下，本文對(duì)官員信息的公開范圍進(jìn)行梳理和重新建構(gòu)，并且針對(duì)實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的問題提出相關(guān)解決方案。 全文共分為五部分：第一部分是對(duì)文章的緣起和背景的簡(jiǎn)單概述。我國(guó)官員信息公開正在逐步發(fā)展，實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)了諸多問題，因此對(duì)官員信息公開范圍的研究具有實(shí)踐意義。我國(guó)學(xué)術(shù)、立法與實(shí)踐也為本文的研究提供了基礎(chǔ)。 第二部分主要討論了官員信息公開范圍如何確定。官員信息進(jìn)行公開的正當(dāng)性基礎(chǔ)是公共利益，而不公開與有限公開主要緣于隱私權(quán)保護(hù)和效率原則。官員信息公開范圍的內(nèi)容包括個(gè)人基本信息、財(cái)產(chǎn)信息、個(gè)人重大事項(xiàng)和職務(wù)信息四大方面。 第三部分是我國(guó)官員信息公開范圍的實(shí)證分析。我國(guó)針對(duì)官員信息公開的實(shí)踐與政府信息公開制度、任前公示制度、財(cái)產(chǎn)公開制度相聯(lián)系，立法較為分散。在實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)了缺乏整體性規(guī)定、公開范圍不完整、公開方式限制公開范圍擴(kuò)大、政府掌握信息過于寬泛等問題。 第四部分是文章的總結(jié)，即對(duì)官員信息公開范圍的具體建構(gòu)。官員信息公開范圍的確定應(yīng)當(dāng)遵循利益平衡原則、比例原則、國(guó)家安全原則、同意原則與公共場(chǎng)所原則四大原則進(jìn)行。官員信息公開的四類信息需要根據(jù)實(shí)踐情況設(shè)立不同的公開方式。 第五部分是文章的結(jié)語。這部分重申了文章主題的研究意義，并且對(duì)官員信息公開范圍的合理確立進(jìn)行了梳理。
[Abstract]:With the continuous improvement of the regulation of official information and the development of government information disclosure, the voice of official information disclosure has become increasingly popular in society. In contrast, the scope of official information in our country has not been improved, and in practice, there is a situation that the official can not be ordered and refuses to be made public. Under this background, this paper combs and reconstructs the public scope of official information, and puts forward some relevant solutions to the problems in practice. The paper is divided into five parts: the first part is a brief overview of the origin and background of the article. The publicity of official information in our country is developing step by step, and there are many problems in practice, so it is of practical significance to study the scope of official information disclosure. China's academic, legislative and practice also provide a basis for this study. The second part mainly discusses how to determine the scope of official information disclosure. The legitimate basis of official information disclosure is public interest, while non-disclosure and limited disclosure are mainly due to the protection of privacy and the principle of efficiency. The contents of official information disclosure include four aspects: personal basic information, property information, personal important affairs and position information. The third part is the empirical analysis of the scope of official information disclosure. The practice of official information disclosure in our country is connected with the system of government information disclosure, the system of publicity before appointment and the system of property disclosure, and the legislation is relatively scattered. In practice, there are some problems, such as the lack of holistic regulation, the incomplete scope of disclosure, the restriction of the expansion of the scope of disclosure by the way of disclosure, and the wide range of information held by the government. The fourth part is the summary of the article, that is, the specific construction of the scope of official information disclosure. The determination of the scope of official information disclosure should follow the principle of balance of interests, the principle of proportionality, the principle of national security, the principle of consent and the principle of public places. Four kinds of information of official information disclosure need to set up different ways of disclosure according to practice. The fifth part is the conclusion of the article. This part reiterates the significance of the research on the subject of the article, and combs the reasonable establishment of the scope of official information disclosure.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 林修鳳;;任前公示工作存在的不足及其改進(jìn)[J];福建農(nóng)林大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年02期

2 屠振宇;;財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度中的隱私權(quán)保護(hù)[J];法商研究;2011年01期

3 皮純協(xié),劉杰;知情權(quán)與情報(bào)公開制度[J];山西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2000年03期

4 范忠信;“陽光法案”與臺(tái)灣“廉政”問題──臺(tái)灣《公職人員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)法》的特點(diǎn)、局限及其立法史[J];臺(tái)灣研究;1994年01期

5 于新循;劉琳;;我國(guó)政府信用建設(shè)研究:基于法制視角[J];四川師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2013年02期

6 斯蒂格利茨;宋華琳;;自由、知情權(quán)和公共話語——透明化在公共生活中的作用[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2002年03期

7 劉桂蘭;郝繼明;;國(guó)外官員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度的典型特征及對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];行政與法;2011年03期

8 顧海波;何冠群;;被問責(zé)官員復(fù)出機(jī)制探析[J];行政與法;2011年05期

9 顧培東;;公眾判意的法理解析——對(duì)許霆案的延伸思考[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2008年04期

10 黃巖;;財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)主體界定:原則與范圍[J];中州學(xué)刊;2010年03期

本文編號(hào)：1903609