本文關鍵詞： 違規(guī)舉牌 權益披露規(guī)則 慢走規(guī)則 股票增持 信息披露　出處：《證券市場導報》2017年09期 　論文類型：期刊論文

【摘要】：針對資本市場違規(guī)舉牌亂象,現(xiàn)行《證券法》第193條以"責令改正和罰款"為主的行政處罰機制無法對違規(guī)舉牌行為的違法性和社會危害性做全面評價,甚至被舉牌人用作"漂白"違規(guī)增持行為的憑據(jù)。違規(guī)舉牌與內幕交易雖均有"誘空"的外在形式,卻有本質差別,以內幕交易禁止規(guī)則規(guī)制違規(guī)舉牌行為并不可行。作為"誘空型虛假陳述"行為,違規(guī)舉牌行為的民事責任規(guī)制是一個世界性難題,我國《證券法》短期內不宜對其民事責任做具體性規(guī)定。借助《證券法》修訂契機,可在新法的"信息披露"一章中設置"持股變動信息披露"專節(jié),并就違規(guī)舉牌行為設定以"限期出售股票"、"沒收違法所得"和"比例性罰款"為主的行政責任以及以"罰金"為主的刑事責任。
[Abstract]:In view of the irregularities in the capital market, the current administrative punishment mechanism of "order correction and fine" in Article 193 of the Securities Law is unable to make a comprehensive evaluation of the illegality and social harmfulness of the illegal practices. Even used by the licensee as evidence of "bleaching" illegal increase behavior. Illegal card and insider trading although there is an external form of "empty", but there are essential differences. It is not feasible to use the rules of prohibition of insider trading to regulate illegal sign raising. As an act of "inducing false statement", the regulation of civil liability for illegal behavior is a worldwide problem. China's Securities Law should not make specific provisions on its civil liability in the short term. With the help of the opportunity of amending the Securities Law, we can set up a special section on "Information Disclosure of Stock ownership changes" in the chapter of "Information Disclosure" of the new Law. It also sets the administrative liability as "selling stock within a time limit", "confiscating illegal income" and "proportional fine" as the main administrative liability and the criminal liability mainly with "fine".
【作者單位】： 西南政法大學經濟法學院;
【基金】：2016年度國家社科基金重點項目“‘寬進嚴管’背景下市場主體信用監(jiān)管制度研究”,項目編號:16AFXD16
【分類號】：D922.287;F832.51
【正文快照】： 市場違規(guī)舉牌案例已有30余起。資本市場舉牌之所以亂引言象頻發(fā),究其原委在于既有的舉牌規(guī)范的行為模式與法我國《證券法》第86條1確立了資本市場大額股票交律后果要件存在漏洞,而不能對違反“權益披露規(guī)則”易行為的基本行為規(guī)則,即“權益披露規(guī)則”和“慢走與“慢走規(guī)則”的，

本文編號：1464405