論政府信息公開中商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)的利益平衡
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-06 08:12
【摘要】：由于制度設(shè)計(jì)上的一些漏洞，《政府信息公開條例》中的商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)規(guī)定在現(xiàn)實(shí)中被行政機(jī)關(guān)利用作為拒絕信息公開申請(qǐng)人申請(qǐng)的一個(gè)借口，信息公開申請(qǐng)人的知情權(quán)得不到保障。行政機(jī)關(guān)中處理信息公開的工作人員未能正確解讀“商業(yè)秘密”及“公共利益”的概念，以及現(xiàn)行信息公開制度中對(duì)這兩個(gè)定義的缺失，是造成上述現(xiàn)象的重要原因。而信息公開制度中對(duì)商業(yè)秘密的保護(hù)程度歸根結(jié)底是執(zhí)政者在公眾、商業(yè)秘密權(quán)利人以及信息公開申請(qǐng)人所代表的利益之間的一個(gè)權(quán)衡和選擇。 本文第一、第二部分首先分析了“商業(yè)秘密”以及“公共利益”的涵義及特征，強(qiáng)調(diào)了“商業(yè)秘密”的相對(duì)性以及“公共利益”的判定原則，為正確判定各方權(quán)利的邊界夯實(shí)了基礎(chǔ)。而信息公開中商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)制度所存在的問題歸根結(jié)底反映的是制度設(shè)計(jì)者面對(duì)多方權(quán)利沖突所做出的選擇問題。文章第三部分分析了信息公開與商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)中各方的權(quán)利沖突以及解決沖突應(yīng)遵循的原則。同時(shí)指明了現(xiàn)行制度偏向于對(duì)商業(yè)秘密權(quán)利人權(quán)利的保護(hù)，，但對(duì)信息公開申請(qǐng)人的權(quán)利保護(hù)不足的問題。這種狀況應(yīng)當(dāng)予以調(diào)整，使各方利益平衡。同時(shí)，通過對(duì)美國信息公開制度中商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)制度從保護(hù)單方利益到利益平衡的發(fā)展過程，歸納出其對(duì)我國信息公開中商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)制度起到的借鑒作用。最后，文章基于利益平衡的原則對(duì)政府信息公開中商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)的制度提出改進(jìn)的建議，重點(diǎn)在于建立制度對(duì)“商業(yè)秘密”進(jìn)行認(rèn)定并分類管理，以及現(xiàn)行信息公開訴訟制度可配合該制度能做的適當(dāng)調(diào)整。
[Abstract]:Due to some loopholes in the design of the system, the provisions on the protection of trade secrets in the "regulations on publicity of Government Information" are used in reality by the administrative authorities as an excuse to refuse applications from applicants for information disclosure. The information disclosure applicant's right to know is not guaranteed. The lack of interpretation of the concepts of "trade secret" and "public interest" and the lack of these two definitions in the current information disclosure system are the important reasons for these phenomena. The degree of protection of trade secrets in the information disclosure system is, in the final analysis, a trade-off and choice between the public, the holders of trade secrets and the interests represented by the applicants for information disclosure. The first and second parts of this paper first analyze the meaning and characteristics of "trade secret" and "public interest", and emphasize the relativity of "trade secret" and the judgment principle of "public interest". The foundation has been laid for the correct determination of the boundary of the rights of the parties. However, the problems existing in the protection system of commercial secrets in information disclosure reflect, in the final analysis, the choices made by system designers in the face of multiple conflicts of rights. The third part analyzes the conflict of rights between information disclosure and trade secret protection and the principles to be followed in resolving the conflict. At the same time, it points out that the current system is biased towards the protection of the rights of the right holders of trade secrets, but the protection of the rights of the applicants for information disclosure is insufficient. This situation should be adjusted to balance the interests of all parties. At the same time, through the development process of the trade secret protection system in the American information disclosure system from the protection of unilateral interests to the balance of interests, the paper sums up its reference to the protection system of trade secrets in the information disclosure of our country. Finally, based on the principle of balance of interests, the paper puts forward some suggestions to improve the system of trade secret protection in the government information disclosure, with the emphasis on establishing a system to identify and classify the "trade secret". And the current information disclosure litigation system can be coordinated with the system can make appropriate adjustments.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.1;D922.294
本文編號(hào)：2225753
[Abstract]:Due to some loopholes in the design of the system, the provisions on the protection of trade secrets in the "regulations on publicity of Government Information" are used in reality by the administrative authorities as an excuse to refuse applications from applicants for information disclosure. The information disclosure applicant's right to know is not guaranteed. The lack of interpretation of the concepts of "trade secret" and "public interest" and the lack of these two definitions in the current information disclosure system are the important reasons for these phenomena. The degree of protection of trade secrets in the information disclosure system is, in the final analysis, a trade-off and choice between the public, the holders of trade secrets and the interests represented by the applicants for information disclosure. The first and second parts of this paper first analyze the meaning and characteristics of "trade secret" and "public interest", and emphasize the relativity of "trade secret" and the judgment principle of "public interest". The foundation has been laid for the correct determination of the boundary of the rights of the parties. However, the problems existing in the protection system of commercial secrets in information disclosure reflect, in the final analysis, the choices made by system designers in the face of multiple conflicts of rights. The third part analyzes the conflict of rights between information disclosure and trade secret protection and the principles to be followed in resolving the conflict. At the same time, it points out that the current system is biased towards the protection of the rights of the right holders of trade secrets, but the protection of the rights of the applicants for information disclosure is insufficient. This situation should be adjusted to balance the interests of all parties. At the same time, through the development process of the trade secret protection system in the American information disclosure system from the protection of unilateral interests to the balance of interests, the paper sums up its reference to the protection system of trade secrets in the information disclosure of our country. Finally, based on the principle of balance of interests, the paper puts forward some suggestions to improve the system of trade secret protection in the government information disclosure, with the emphasis on establishing a system to identify and classify the "trade secret". And the current information disclosure litigation system can be coordinated with the system can make appropriate adjustments.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.1;D922.294
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 宋靖;淺論公民的知情權(quán)及其保護(hù)[J];福建政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年01期
2 何君;林裕;;公共權(quán)益與個(gè)人隱私權(quán)利的平衡——對(duì)貴州“中華女”事件的思考[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年13期
3 馮琳;陳士林;;論權(quán)利沖突的形成原因及解決機(jī)制[J];江蘇科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年01期
4 王曉錦;劉道遠(yuǎn);;《物權(quán)法》土地征收中的公共利益研究[J];湖南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2007年03期
5 吳鳴;公共政策的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)問題;2004年05期
6 蘇東;行政舉證責(zé)任及其分配[J];江西行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年04期
7 王立法;;WTO背景下我國商業(yè)秘密的法律保護(hù)[J];江蘇商論;2008年12期
8 劉文慧;;公共利益界定的法律程序規(guī)制[J];商品與質(zhì)量;2012年S5期
9 胡佳;王雅麗;;公共利益的層次化界定及應(yīng)用[J];宜賓學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年11期
10 馬嶺;;權(quán)利沖突與權(quán)利位階[J];云南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(法學(xué)版);2008年05期
本文編號(hào)：2225753
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/xingzhengfalunwen/2225753.html
最近更新
教材專著
