本文關(guān)鍵詞：我國基金會規(guī)范模式轉(zhuǎn)型研究　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2014年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 基金會 行政管控 法人治理 司法介入

【摘要】：本文以基金會為研究對象，以中國社會結(jié)構(gòu)變遷為背景，以方法論個體主義為基本進(jìn)路，綜合運用法律社會學(xué)與比較分析的方法，反思我國現(xiàn)行基金會規(guī)范模式的缺陷及其生成原因，提出我國基金會的應(yīng)然規(guī)范模式，并從內(nèi)部構(gòu)造、行政支撐與司法介入等多個角度探索與基金會的發(fā)展實踐相適應(yīng)的具體制度。本文的寫作目的可分為三個層次：第一層次是為現(xiàn)存的基金會困局提供制度性解決方案；第二層次是為中國團(tuán)體法制的發(fā)展提供新的視角；最后是為中國公民社會的型塑提供本土化經(jīng)驗。 本文通過法律文本解讀和法律實證分析，對我國基金會法律制度的主要規(guī)則構(gòu)成以及在實踐中的運作效果進(jìn)行剖析，歸納我國的基金會立法為“行政管控型”規(guī)范模式，并指出其不但未能實現(xiàn)所欲的規(guī)范目的，反而造成基金會實踐中的大量失范現(xiàn)象。這一規(guī)范模式的形成具有歷史的和制度的原因，其不僅肇因于我國基金會的生成情境，而且與基金會的組織構(gòu)造和組織性質(zhì)密切相關(guān)�；诖�，我們不能全然否定行政管控的必要性和重要性，而應(yīng)當(dāng)保持管控目的和管控手段的契合，由此，提出行政管控型基金會規(guī)范模式需要向法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式轉(zhuǎn)型。 法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式具有正當(dāng)性和可行性，具有契合基金會組織預(yù)設(shè)的價值與功能。首先，從國際立法趨勢來看，法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式具有合規(guī)律性；從組織功能預(yù)期來看，法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式具有合目的性，因而無論是經(jīng)驗的角度，還是理性的角度，都可證成其正當(dāng)性。其次，法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式還具有可行性，從基金會自身的發(fā)展階段來看，其已經(jīng)具備了內(nèi)部治理的能力；從捐贈者的角度而言，也對基金會法人治理存在需求。再次，法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式體現(xiàn)了自由、平等和效率的價值，同時具有重要的政治、經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會功能。因此，無論以客觀的支撐條件觀之，還是以主觀的制度內(nèi)核觀之，我國基金會法律制度均已具備轉(zhuǎn)型的基礎(chǔ)。 因應(yīng)法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式的確立，基金會的內(nèi)部構(gòu)造需要發(fā)生調(diào)整。本文通過對域外和我國基金會法人治理經(jīng)驗的總結(jié)，歸納出“理事會中心”一元結(jié)構(gòu)模式、“理事會-監(jiān)事會”二元結(jié)構(gòu)模式以及“評議員會-理事會-監(jiān)事會”三元結(jié)構(gòu)模式三種具體的制度安排，并通過對照我國的基金會法人治理模式，反思既存的問題及產(chǎn)生之原因。同時，本文關(guān)注我國基金會法人治理的實際運行樣態(tài)，以中國紅十字基金會和深圳壹基金公益基金會的改革探索為切入點，以實踐反觀制度，以制度反思理論，最終提出我國基金會法人治理結(jié)構(gòu)的應(yīng)然選擇。 法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式需要與之適應(yīng)的行政規(guī)制策略。在重塑國家和社會關(guān)系已成為迫切現(xiàn)實要求的背景下，基金會行政規(guī)制策略必然需要發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)向，即從“縱向的隸屬關(guān)系”轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)椤皺M向的伙伴關(guān)系”。基于此，應(yīng)當(dāng)遵循行政法上的比例原則，以適當(dāng)性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、必要性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和均衡性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為根據(jù)，一方面優(yōu)化強(qiáng)制性行政規(guī)制措施，將準(zhǔn)入規(guī)范中的“雙重管理體制”轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)椤耙辉芾眢w制”；將監(jiān)督規(guī)范中的“事前監(jiān)督”轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)椤笆潞蟊O(jiān)督”。另一方面改進(jìn)激勵性行政規(guī)制措施，建立有效的稅收激勵機(jī)制和公平的財政資助機(jī)制。 法人治理型基金會規(guī)范模式強(qiáng)調(diào)司法介入的作用。司法介入基金會法人治理具有必要性，這源于基金會自我治理存在局限、基金會行政監(jiān)管存在邊界，同時立法所欲建立的信息披露制度亦未發(fā)揮預(yù)期作用。但是，司法介入基金會法人治理必須堅守一定的限度，一方面，應(yīng)當(dāng)以司法權(quán)的作用范圍框定介入的廣度；另一方面，應(yīng)當(dāng)以司法權(quán)與行政權(quán)和基金會私法獨立性之間的關(guān)系確定介入的深度。 本文可預(yù)期的創(chuàng)新之處首先在于研究進(jìn)路的設(shè)定，而對這一研究進(jìn)路的遵循也決定了研究主題和研究內(nèi)容的創(chuàng)新性。具體而言，本文遵循兩條具體的研究進(jìn)路：一是“社會結(jié)構(gòu)變遷與分化”。本文認(rèn)為，改革開放以來從“單質(zhì)同一性社會”到“異質(zhì)多元性社會”的轉(zhuǎn)變的宏觀背景是理解一切具體問題的現(xiàn)實語境。改革所導(dǎo)致的廣泛的社會流動與利益群體的分化，正是基金會產(chǎn)生的根本原因。因應(yīng)這一變化的內(nèi)在張力，面對基金會法律制度的不適應(yīng)性，才產(chǎn)生了改革的必要性與可能性。因此，本文將社會結(jié)構(gòu)的變遷與分化設(shè)置成制度批判與制度構(gòu)建的基本前提。二是“方法論個人主義”。本文認(rèn)為，個人構(gòu)成了認(rèn)知科學(xué)中分析的終極單位，也是各種價值的最終歸宿。不考慮有目的的行動者個人的計劃和決策，所有的社會現(xiàn)象都不可能得到理解。個體絕不是制度的被動接受者，而是制度的主動創(chuàng)造者，至少是能動的反應(yīng)者�；诖耍疚膶饡芍贫鹊脑O(shè)計著眼于個人的動機(jī)與利益的滿足，承認(rèn)基金會是私人追求公益目的的組織形式。因此在制度構(gòu)建的過程中，從最大化促進(jìn)個人實現(xiàn)公益目標(biāo)的角度出發(fā)，認(rèn)為基金會法律制度應(yīng)當(dāng)實現(xiàn)由“他律為主，自治為輔”轉(zhuǎn)向“自治為主，他律為輔”。
[Abstract]:In this paper, the foundation as the research object, to China social structure changes as the background, the methodological individualism as the basic approach and method of comprehensive use of legal sociology and comparative analysis, to reflect China's current foundation defects and their causes of normative pattern, proposed our country foundation should be standard mode, and from the internal structure the specific practice of administrative support system, and judicial intervention in the aspects of exploration and foundation to adapt. The purpose of this paper can be divided into three levels: the first level is the foundation for the existing predicament in system solutions; the second level is to provide a new perspective for the development of Chinese group method; finally is to provide experience for the localization of China civil society and shaping.
In this paper, through the interpretation of legal texts and legal analysis, and in practice the operation effect of the main rules in our legal system of fund analysis, summed up the foundation of legislation for the "administrative control" standard mode, and points out that it not only failed to achieve the desired objective standard, but the cause of foundation practice in a large number of anomie phenomenon. The formation of this standard model of historical and institutional reasons, which not only causes generation of situation in our country foundation, but also closely related to organizational structure and organizational nature foundation. Based on this, we can not completely deny the administrative control of the importance and necessity, and shall keep fit, control objective and control means the proposed administrative control type foundation standard mode need to corporate governance fund will regulate the mode transition.
The corporate governance fund has the legitimacy and feasibility of standard mode, has the value and function with fund default. First of all, from the trend of international legislation, the corporate governance fund will regulate the pattern with regularity; from the organization perspective, corporate governance fund will regulate the mode with purpose, and whether it is the basis of experience, or a rational point of view, can justify its legitimacy. Secondly, the corporate governance fund will regulate the mode also has the feasibility, from the foundation of their own development stage, which has the ability of internal governance; from the donor's perspective, there is demand for the foundation of corporate governance again, the corporate governance foundation specification model embodies the freedom, equality and efficiency value, also has important political, economic and social functions. Therefore, whether to support the objective The legal system of the foundation of China has already had the foundation of the transformation.
The fund will establish standardized corporate governance mode, the internal structure of the fund will need adjustment. Based on the foreign and China foundation of corporate governance experience, summed up the "Board Center" one yuan "mode, the Council and the board of supervisors" two element structure mode and the "council members - Council the board of supervisors" - three yuan structure mode of three kinds of specific institutional arrangements, and through the control of the foundation of corporate governance model, existing problems and reasons of reflection. At the same time, this paper focus on the actual operation state of China's foundation of corporate governance, to reform China Red Cross Foundation and Shenzhen one foundation charity the fund will explore as a starting point, to practice in system, the system finally proposes the choice of reflection theory, the foundation of corporate governance structure.
The corporate governance fund will regulate the administrative regulation strategy and the model needs to adapt. In reshaping the relationship between state and society has become the urgent requirements of the background, foundation of administrative regulation strategy must be changed, that is from the "subordination" into "vertical horizontal partnership". Based on this, should follow the administrative the law of the principle of proportionality, to appropriate standards, necessity and proportionality standard according to the standard, a mandatory administrative measures to optimize the regulation, the norms of the "dual management system" into "one management system"; will supervise the code's "pre supervision" to "supervision". On the other hand, the improvement of administrative measures of incentive regulation, establish an effective tax incentive mechanism and fair financial aid mechanism.
Corporate governance foundation specification model emphasizes judicial intervention. The foundation of judicial intervention in corporate governance is necessary, which originates from the foundation of self governance is limited and the foundation of administrative supervision and legislation to the existence of boundary, the establishment of information disclosure system is not expected to play a role. However, the foundation of judicial intervention in corporate governance must be to certain extent, on the one hand, should be based on the scope of judicial intervention to frame the breadth; on the other hand, should be based on the judicial power and administrative power and the foundation of the relationship between civil law independence to determine the depth of intervention.
The expected innovation first lies in the approach of setting, and follow the route of this research also determines the innovation and research topics. Specifically, the following two specific approaches: one is the change of social structure and differentiation. This paper argues that, since the reform and opening up from the "Elemental the same society" to "macro background of the transformation of heterogeneous society" is the realistic context of understanding all of specific problems. The reform caused extensive differentiation of social mobility and interest groups, is the fundamental reason for the fund will produce. Because of the intrinsic tension should be the change, facing the foundation of legal system not only have the adaptability, necessity and possibility of the reform. Therefore, the basic premise of change and the social structure differentiation is to construct the system of criticism and system. The two is "methodological individualism Yi. "This paper argues that people constitute the ultimate analysis in cognitive science, but also the destiny of all values. The actor's purpose of planning and decision-making, all social phenomena can not be understood. The individual is not the passive recipient system, but the active creator of the system, at least is active reaction. Based on this, this paper design of motivation and interest fund legal system focus on personal satisfaction, that foundation is a private pursuit of the purpose of public welfare organization. So in the process of system construction, from the perspective of promoting the maximization individuals to achieve the objectives of public welfare perspective, that fund legal system should be based by" the heteronomy, autonomy as "to" autonomy and heteronomy supplement ".

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.182.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 葛云松;;中國的財團(tuán)法人制度展望[J];北大法律評論;2002年00期

2 信春鷹;;法律移植的理論與實踐[J];北方法學(xué);2007年03期

3 方流芳;國企法定代表人的法律地位、權(quán)力和利益沖突[J];比較法研究;1999年Z1期

4 張德美;淺論法律移植的方式[J];比較法研究;2000年03期

5 張千帆;“公共利益”的構(gòu)成——對行政法的目標(biāo)以及“平衡”的意義之探討[J];比較法研究;2005年05期

6 蔡立東;楊宗仁;;論股東會決議撤銷權(quán)的主體及其行使[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2008年05期

7 周龍杰;;論法人監(jiān)事的引入[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2012年03期

8 稅兵;;基金會治理的法律道路——《基金會管理條例》為何遭遇“零適用”?[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2010年06期

9 蔡立東;;法人分類模式的立法選擇[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2012年01期

10 鄭少華;經(jīng)濟(jì)法中的社團(tuán)——從社會法視角展開[J];法學(xué);2000年02期

，

本文編號：1415474