期货交易所处罚权研究
发布时间：2018-09-17 13:50
【摘要】：期货市场具有套期保值、发现价格、规避风险等功能,在金融市场占据着重要的地位。我国对期货市场实行三级监管模式,期货交易所作为一线监管机构对期货市场的监督管理起着决定性的作用。期货交易所作为一个自律组织,以其制定的章程、交易规则等为依据对期货交易进行自律管理。期货交易所的处罚权是期货交易所自律管理的基础,为其他自律管理的实施提供保障。期货交易所的处罚权对期货交易的自律管理具有重要作用,但期货交易所的处罚权具有“侵益性”,现有的法规和期货交易所的自律规章中并未对期货交易所处罚权的行使程序及救济途径进行规定。因此本文主要是探究期货交易所自律管理权中的处罚权,对处罚权的本质进行辨析、对处罚权的行使程序及救济途径提出完善的意见。期货交易所的处罚权与其他自律管理权相比更具有公权力的色彩,现有的法律、法规却没有对交易所处罚权的行使程序和救济途径进行规定。法律的缺位致使期货交易所处罚权的行使具有“随意性”,因此有必要对期货交易所的处罚权的行使程序及救济途径进行规制。期货交易所的处罚,顾名思义是对违反期货交易所规章行为的一种制裁。在法治社会,笔者认为任何剥夺公民、法人、其他组织权利的行为都应该有合法的依据,并且应该在合法的框架内行使自己的权力或权利。因此本文首先分析期货交易所处罚权的规则来源,分别从法律、期货交易所章程、交易规则、所违规处理办法等规定中分析期货交易所处罚权的来源。权利或权力的行使应该遵循一定的程序,不同的权利类型适用不同的规则。期货交易所处罚权规则来源的多样性决定了期货交易所处罚权法律属性的多样性。目前关于期货交易所处罚权的法律属性有不同的观点,主要有纪律处分说、行政处罚说、违约处罚说。笔者对主要学说进行辨析,并结合各个学说的优缺点提出期货交易所处罚权具有行政处罚和纪律处分的双重属性的特点,本文将其称为“纪律处罚”。一方面期货交易所在行使处罚权时具有管理职能带有公权力色彩,具有行政处罚的法律属性;另一方面期货交易所又是基于会员的认可,为维护组织的利益,对违反期货交易规章的行为进行的处分,具有纪律处分的法律属性。期货交易所的处罚权具有双重属性,既有外部管理的行政处罚的属性又有内部管理的纪律处分的属性,行政处罚与纪律处分由于法律属性不同适用的法律规则也不同,那么具有双重属性的期货交易所处罚权应该适用什么样的法律规则?笔者接下来将分析期货交易所处罚权作为行政处罚和纪律处分行使时的问题与障碍,并在论文最后部分针对期货交易所“纪律处罚”行使的问题与障碍提出规制期货交易所处罚权的建议。期货交易所处罚权具有公权力属性,因此必须对期货交易所处罚权参照行政处罚的行使程序进行规制。无救济则无权利,仅仅规制期货交易所处罚权的行使程序是不够的,还需完善救济途径。期货交易所不当行使处罚权时相对人的法律救济制度存在缺陷,内部救济不足,适用行政诉讼制度和民事诉讼制度都存在困境,因此笔者针对上述问题从期货交易所处罚权的双重法律属性角度出发,提出完善内部救济制度以及外部救济途径的意见。
[Abstract]:Futures market has the functions of hedging, price discovery, risk aversion and so on. It occupies an important position in the financial market. China implements a three-level supervision model for the futures market, and the futures exchange, as a first-line supervision and management institution, plays a decisive role in the supervision and management of the futures market. The penalty power of the futures exchange is the foundation of the self-discipline management of the futures exchange and provides guarantee for the implementation of other self-discipline management. The existing laws and regulations and the self-discipline rules of the futures exchange do not stipulate the procedures and relief ways of exercising the power of punishment of the futures exchange. Opinions. The penalty power of futures exchanges is more public power than other self-regulatory powers. Existing laws and regulations do not stipulate the procedures and relief ways for the execution of the penalty power of futures exchanges. Punishment by the futures exchange, as its name implies, is a sanction against violations of the rules and regulations of the futures exchange. Therefore, this paper first analyzes the source of the penalty power of the futures exchange, and then analyzes the source of the penalty power of the futures exchange from the law, the articles of association of the futures exchange, the trading rules and the treatment of violations. At present, there are different opinions on the legal attributes of the penalty power of the futures exchange, such as the theory of disciplinary punishment, the theory of administrative punishment and the theory of penalty for breach of contract. On the one hand, the futures exchange has the management function with the public power color, and has the legal attribute of administrative penalty; on the other hand, the futures exchange is based on the membership. Recognition, in order to safeguard the interests of the organization, the punishment of violations of the rules and regulations of futures trading has the legal attribute of disciplinary punishment. Different from the applicable legal rules, what kind of legal rules should be applied to the penalty power of futures exchange with dual attributes? The author will then analyze the problems and obstacles when the penalty power of futures exchange is used as administrative punishment and disciplinary punishment, and in the last part of the paper will focus on the "disciplinary punishment" line of futures exchange. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate the penalty power of the futures exchange according to the procedure of administrative penalty. Without remedy, there is no right. It is not enough to regulate the procedure of executing the penalty power of the futures exchange only, and it needs to be improved. There are some defects in the legal remedy system of the counterpart when the futures exchange improperly exercises the power of punishment, and the internal remedy is insufficient. There are difficulties in applying the administrative litigation system and the civil litigation system. Comments on external relief channels.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.287
本文编号：2246122
[Abstract]:Futures market has the functions of hedging, price discovery, risk aversion and so on. It occupies an important position in the financial market. China implements a three-level supervision model for the futures market, and the futures exchange, as a first-line supervision and management institution, plays a decisive role in the supervision and management of the futures market. The penalty power of the futures exchange is the foundation of the self-discipline management of the futures exchange and provides guarantee for the implementation of other self-discipline management. The existing laws and regulations and the self-discipline rules of the futures exchange do not stipulate the procedures and relief ways of exercising the power of punishment of the futures exchange. Opinions. The penalty power of futures exchanges is more public power than other self-regulatory powers. Existing laws and regulations do not stipulate the procedures and relief ways for the execution of the penalty power of futures exchanges. Punishment by the futures exchange, as its name implies, is a sanction against violations of the rules and regulations of the futures exchange. Therefore, this paper first analyzes the source of the penalty power of the futures exchange, and then analyzes the source of the penalty power of the futures exchange from the law, the articles of association of the futures exchange, the trading rules and the treatment of violations. At present, there are different opinions on the legal attributes of the penalty power of the futures exchange, such as the theory of disciplinary punishment, the theory of administrative punishment and the theory of penalty for breach of contract. On the one hand, the futures exchange has the management function with the public power color, and has the legal attribute of administrative penalty; on the other hand, the futures exchange is based on the membership. Recognition, in order to safeguard the interests of the organization, the punishment of violations of the rules and regulations of futures trading has the legal attribute of disciplinary punishment. Different from the applicable legal rules, what kind of legal rules should be applied to the penalty power of futures exchange with dual attributes? The author will then analyze the problems and obstacles when the penalty power of futures exchange is used as administrative punishment and disciplinary punishment, and in the last part of the paper will focus on the "disciplinary punishment" line of futures exchange. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate the penalty power of the futures exchange according to the procedure of administrative penalty. Without remedy, there is no right. It is not enough to regulate the procedure of executing the penalty power of the futures exchange only, and it needs to be improved. There are some defects in the legal remedy system of the counterpart when the futures exchange improperly exercises the power of punishment, and the internal remedy is insufficient. There are difficulties in applying the administrative litigation system and the civil litigation system. Comments on external relief channels.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.287
【参考文献】
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 韩朝炜;证券交易所自律司法介入研究[D];华东政法大学;2013年
，本文编号：2246122
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/jingjifalunwen/2246122.html
