中国建立公职人员财产公开制度面临的阻力与对策建议

发布时间：2018-03-30 08:49

本文选题：公职人员　切入点：财产公开　出处：《山东大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：近年来,中国反腐力度不断加大,一大批腐败官员被查处,“打老虎”、“拍苍蝇”的举措已实现常态化。同时,伴随着中国共产风党内纪律作风的整顿,中国政治清明程度得到较大的提升。在此背景下,社会上对依靠制度反腐的呼声迎来一次新的高涨。的确,只有落实到制度的建立上,才是反腐措施得以长久贯彻的出路。公职人员财产公开制度作为反腐败系列制度的重要组成部分,在防止腐败方面发挥独特而不可忽视作用。该制度自200余年前在瑞典建立以来,己为世界大多数国家普遍接受,成为许多国家政府道德法的重要组成部分,关于财产公开的理论研究和制度实践也不断深入。但在中国,财产申报或公开由于存在诸多缺陷,难以称得上是建立了真正的制度。公职人员财产公开制度较完备的国家首推美国。其制度实施效果较好,也成为世界国家参考的范本。亚洲的韩国、日本也建立了相同的制度,两国与中国在地理位置上接近,社会文化方面存在诸多相似,因此其财产公开制度有很大的借鉴意义。通过对三国财产公开制度的建立过程、主要内容和实施效果的详细研究可见,成熟财产公开制度的实现是一个渐进的过程,它在立法上、理念上和技术上存在着诸多条件。本文对于中国建立公职人员财产公开制度的阻力,也从上述三个角度进行了分析。在立法上,现行财产公开停留在党纪、政纪层面,诸多文件管辖范围与效力交叉,制度立法还面临着财产公开带来的法的价值冲突；在理念上,来自传统思想的阻滞与现实中面临的伦理困境并存；在技术上,国家层面的相关规定在公开主体、内容、种类、管理及责任、配套措施方面均不完善,与国外相比差距明显。因此,本文借鉴美、韩、日三国在建立公职人员财产公开制度方面的有利经验,针对中国建立相同制度面临的阻力,提出了一些对策建议。在法律层面,要理顺诸多效力不等的规范性文件之间的关系,做好财产公开立法与诸多文件的衔接工作,还要权衡财产公开立法中公众知情权与个人隐私权之间的冲突,力图在二者之中找到最佳平衡点；在理念层面,要及时更新不合时宜的传统思想,加强对公职人员的伦理教育,使财产公开内化为公职人员的伦理行为；在技术层面,要参考域外完善的财产公开制度,同时照顾中国的社会和政治现实,扩大公开主体,细化公开内容,增加公开种类,完善公开管理及责任,建立金融实名制等配套制度。中国正处于腐败高发期,而中国近几年的反腐力度也前所未有加大,此时正是顺应时势、力推公职人员财产公开制度的良好时机。希望通过本文的一些研究,能为中国公职人员财产公开制度的建立起到推动作用。
[Abstract]:In recent years, China's anti-corruption efforts have been intensified, a large number of corrupt officials have been investigated and dealt with, and the measures of "fighting tigers" and "swatting flies" have been regularized. At the same time, with the rectification of the inner-party discipline style of the Communist Party of China, The degree of Chinese political Pure Brightness has been greatly improved. Against this background, the demand for relying on institutional anti-corruption in society has ushered in a new upsurge. Indeed, only the establishment of the system can be achieved. It is the only way out that anti-corruption measures can be carried out for a long time. As an important part of the anti-corruption system, the system of public property disclosure of public officials is an important part of the anti-corruption system. Having played a unique and undeniable role in the prevention of corruption. Since its establishment in Sweden more than 200 years ago, the system has been universally accepted by most countries of the world and has become an important part of the moral laws of many governments, The theoretical research and institutional practice on property disclosure are also deepening. However, in China, there are many defects in property declaration or disclosure. It is difficult to say that a real system has been established. The United States is the first country to have a more complete system of disclosure of public officials' property. The implementation of the system is better, and it has also become a model for the countries of the world. South Korea and Japan in Asia have also established the same system. The two countries are geographically close to China, and there are many similarities in social and cultural aspects, so their property disclosure system has great significance for reference. Through the establishment process of property disclosure system in the three countries, A detailed study of the main contents and implementation effects shows that the realization of the mature property disclosure system is a gradual process. There are many conditions in concept and technology. This paper also analyzes the resistance to the establishment of public property disclosure system in China from the above three angles. In legislation, the current property disclosure stays at the level of party discipline and government discipline. Many documents have overlapping jurisdiction and effectiveness, institutional legislation also faces the value conflict of the law brought about by property publicity; in the concept, the block from the traditional thought and the ethical dilemma in reality coexist; in the technology, the system legislation also faces the conflict of the value of the law brought about by the property publicity. The relevant regulations at the national level are not perfect in the aspects of public subject, content, category, management and responsibility, and supporting measures, which are obviously different from those of foreign countries. Therefore, this paper draws lessons from the United States, South Korea, The favorable experience of the three Japanese countries in establishing the public property disclosure system for public officials, in view of the resistance faced by China in establishing the same system, puts forward some countermeasures and suggestions. At the legal level, it is necessary to straighten out the relationship between many normative documents with varying effects. It is necessary to balance the conflict between the public right to know and the right to privacy in the legislation of property disclosure, and try to find the best balance between them. It is necessary to update the outdated traditional ideas in a timely manner, strengthen the ethical education of public officials, and internalize property disclosure into the ethical behavior of public officials; at the technical level, reference should be made to the perfect property disclosure system outside the country. At the same time, we should take care of China's social and political reality, expand the public subject, refine the open content, increase the variety of publicity, improve the open management and responsibility, and establish a supporting system such as the financial real-name system. China is in a period of high incidence of corruption. In recent years, China has also stepped up its anti-corruption efforts. This time is a good time to adapt to the current situation and push forward the system of property disclosure for public officials. I hope that through some research in this paper, It can promote the establishment of public property disclosure system in China.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D630.9

【参考文献】