近现代中国责任内阁体制研究

发布时间：2018-04-20 17:40

本文选题：责任内阁制 + 总统集权制　；参考：《武汉大学》2012年博士论文

【摘要】：责任内阁制系指享有主权的国民通过行使政治决断权产生出的代议制的政权组织形式。行政权与立法权相互制约平衡是其突出特征,国民主权、有限政府是责任内阁体制背后的理念。近代中国仿行大陆法系国家进行了内阁制的实践,经历了皇权体制下的内阁制、三权分立下的内阁制、五权分治下的内阁制三个阶段。其间,围绕着内阁制还是总统制更适合中国国情,中国人进行了多种实践,出现了一种奇特的现象：凡是规定内阁制的宪法多未得到实施,凡是实施中的宪法均为总统集权制。这即是说,近现代中国内阁制存在严重的文本表达与政治实践的背离。究其原因,中国责任内阁体制建设属于政权主导型,自上而下是其路径选择,这肯定要经历一个分权——集权——分权的过程,但无论是主张内阁制还是总统集权制,制度设计背后展现的理念都不是国民主权、三权分立的有限政府,而是诸权归于一元。传统政治文化中的一元集权传统随着近代立宪进程而沉潜入中国人的思想观念深层,通过语言、思维方式影响中国人的行为选择。无论是革命党人、立宪派还是后来的北洋军阀、国民党统治集团,内阁制实践呈现出的特色是最高决策权本身独立,不受任何制约,在此以下通过权力单项传递设置各级各类衙门行使具体统治权。这反应了一元文化在近现代责任内阁体制变迁时的承续与传递。本文以法律文化学的分析方法为研究路径,通过考察近现代中国内阁体制的变迁来为中国特色社会主义政权组织体制建设提供历史经验。具体而言,本文分为三大部分,五章。第一章为第一部分,主要是比较视野下的基本理论分析,即“责任内阁思想传入的中国语境”。首先,本章考察了西方责任内阁的理念与制度,国民主权、有限政府是英法美德日诸国内阁制度的基本理念,各国因地制宜设计的责任内阁制度反映了西方自由主义传统的深深影响。其次,本章考察了中国传统政治文化与内阁的关系,并就中国历史上的内阁制度进行分析,服从于专制皇权、价值指向的一元主义决定了中国历史上的内阁制不能转化为责任内阁制度。再次,本章考察了西方责任内阁思想传入的历史机缘、传入历程及传入时与中国传统文化的冲突整合。第二部分为历史考察视野下的近代内阁制,即按照统治形态的不同对近现代中国内阁体制变迁进行研究。其中,第二章为“皇权体制下的内阁制”。首先,本章考察了清末立宪思潮中关于内阁制的论争与设想。其次,本章对《钦定宪法大纲》和《十九信条》体系下的内阁制的表达与实践进行深入分析,并对皇权体制下内阁制表达与实践的分离进行原因分析。第三章为“三权分立下的内阁制”。首先,本章对中国历史上第一个也是唯一一个资产阶级性质的文件——《临时约法》设计的内阁制进行规范分析,指出这种包藏革命党人控制国家大权心思的片面内阁制(或称内阁专权制)具有先天缺陷,且开创了工具主义宪法的恶劣先例。其次,本章围绕着内阁制变迁这条主线,对北洋军阀统治时期的政权组织形式进行总体分析,并以“贿选宪法”下的内阁制为个案分析的样本,冷面分析此一时期风起云涌的制宪风潮。此一时期宪法文件不断出台,但宪法效力极低,宪法虚置乃至废弃是突出特色,军阀们玩弄法统的手段越来越纯熟,刺刀保驾下的统治各有其法统,但此一时期所谓选举、所谓议员、所谓国会、所谓宪法,成为阴谋、伎俩、交易的同义词,整个宪政环境完全被污染,中国人的宪法信仰完全被侵蚀。再次,本章对三权分立形式下的内阁制实践进行评析,指出经由《临时约法》、“袁记约法”及“贿选宪法”的开创先例,法统已糜烂不可用,责任内阁制离国人的期望越来越远,中国人对宪法的信仰己被政治运行的权力决断侵蚀殆尽,“除军阀、兴民权”的国民革命成为政治运动的主题。第四章为“五权分治下的内阁制”。首先,本章对国民党党治国家权能分治、五权分治体制进行介绍,强调党治国家体制是中国宪法文化的一次更新,实现了从个人集权向集团集权的转变,解决了辛亥革命以来政权合法性基础论证的问题。其次,本章考察了党治国家体制下训政时期的内阁制建设,先阐释作为前置性问题的党政之关系,继而以抗战为界点考察抗战前及抗战期间的内阁制的争论与实践,最后就训政时期内阁制建设进行评析,指出国民党与政府之关系非责任内阁制的中国表达,行政院与立法院的关系也不符合责任内阁制的要求,至于抗战时期的国防最高委员会则将常规科层制下的行政权变为其附庸,内阁制从未成为政治现实。再次,本章考察了四六宪法下的内阁制争论与实践,先就四六宪法关于政权组织形式设置的历史渊源进行探析,接着依据经典宪政理论对四六宪法下的内阁制进行规范分析与实证分析,指出四六宪法下“修正的”总统制(或称结合总统制与内阁制部分特征的混合体制)因个人集权的需要蜕变为个人独裁体制。最后,本章对党治国家体制下的内阁制进行评析,指出改组后的国民党“以俄为师”,厉行党治,较好解决了政权合法性问题,进行了广泛的组织动员,从而取得全国政权；但因内外种种原因本身未能实现从革命型政党向法理型政党的转变,常规科层制也贯彻不彻底,全能政治反倒因为派系林立、军事斗争的失败而崩溃,有限的责任内阁体制终究未能建立。第三部分为本文第五章,是本文的结论部分。首先,本章对近现代中国内阁体制的变迁历程进行总结,指出其变迁历程的权力支配、人治主义和工具主义特征。其次,本章以法律文化学的分析方法探究决定近现代中国内阁体制变迁走向的文化基因——一元集权传统是如何发挥决定性作用的。近代以来一元集权文化沉潜入中国人思想观念的深层,表面上看支配中国人行为模式的是宪法法律,实际上是权力；中国形式上标榜立宪主义、责任内阁,实际上是人治主义与权力支配。一元文化通过语言、思维模式发挥功能,所谓宪法、政府、选举、政府在近代中国成为交易、伎俩、工具的代名词,权力归于一元是中国人设计政权组织形式的出发点,是思维构建的基石。最后,本章根据前文研究,寻求历史的智慧,总结可供中国特色社会主义宪政建设的历史经验。
[Abstract]:The responsibility cabinet system refers to the form of the representative regime that the nationals enjoying sovereign rights produce through the exercise of the right of political decision. The mutual restriction and balance between the administrative power and the legislative power is its prominent feature, the national sovereignty and the limited government are the ideas behind the responsibility cabinet system. The cabinet system under the imperial system, the cabinet system under the separation of the three powers and the cabinet system of the five powers under the division of the five powers were divided into three stages. During the period, the cabinet system or the presidential system was more suitable for the national conditions of China. The Chinese people carried out a variety of practice, and there appeared a strange phenomenon: the constitution which stipulates the internal cabinet system has not been implemented, and the Constitution in the implementation of the constitution has not been implemented. The law is the president's centralism. That is to say, there is a serious deviation between the Chinese cabinet system and the political practice in the modern Chinese cabinet system. The reason is that the construction of the Chinese responsibility cabinet system is dominated by the regime, from top to bottom is its path choice. This must experience a decentralization - centralization - decentralization process, but no matter the cabinet. The idea behind the system design is not the national sovereignty, the limited government of the three powers is divided, but the power of the traditional political culture is attributed to the one yuan. The traditional political culture, with the modern constitutional process, sinks into the deep thought of the Chinese people, through language, and the way of thinking affects the choice of behavior of the Chinese people. Whether it is the revolutionary party, the constitutionalists or the later Beiyang warlords, the Kuomintang ruling group, the cabinet system is characterized by the independence of the supreme decision-making power itself, without any restriction. The specific power of the government at all levels and various types of government is set up through the transmission of power. This reacts the culture of one yuan to the modern and modern responsibility cabinet. The succession and transmission of the system of change.
This paper, taking the analysis method of legal culture as the research path, provides historical experience for the construction of the organizational system of socialist political power with Chinese characteristics by examining the changes in the modern Chinese cabinet system. In particular, this article is divided into three parts, five chapters. The first chapter is the first part, mainly the basic theoretical analysis under the comparative perspective, that is, " First, this chapter examines the concept and system of the Western responsible cabinet, the national sovereignty, the limited government is the basic idea of the cabinet system of the British and French virtues and Japan, and the responsibility cabinet system for the local local conditions reflects the deep influence of the western liberalism tradition. Secondly, this chapter inspects the central government. The relationship between the traditional political culture and the cabinet, and the analysis of the cabinet system in Chinese history, obeys the autocratic imperial power, and the value directed monism decides that the cabinet system in Chinese history can not be transformed into a responsible cabinet system. Again, this chapter examines the historical opportunity, the introduction and introduction of the thought of the Western responsibility. The integration of the conflict with Chinese traditional culture.
The second part is the modern cabinet system in the view of historical investigation, that is to study the changes of the cabinet system in modern China according to the different ruling forms. The second chapter is "the cabinet system under the imperial system". First, this chapter examines the controversy and imagination about the cabinet system in the constitutional trend of thought in the late Qing Dynasty. Secondly, this chapter is on the outline of the constitution of the Qin Dynasty The expression and practice of the cabinet system under the system of < nineteen credo > are deeply analyzed, and the reasons for the separation and expression of cabinet system under the imperial power system are analyzed.
The third chapter is "the cabinet system under the separation of the three powers". First, this chapter conducts a normative analysis of the first and only document of the nature of the bourgeoisie in the history of China, the cabinet system designed by the provisional law, and points out that the one-sided cabinet system (or the cabinet exclusive system), which holds the revolutionary party's control of the state's power, is innate. Secondly, this chapter focuses on the main line of the cabinet system change, and makes a general analysis of the form of political power in the period of the Northern Warlords' reign, and takes the sample of the cabinet system under the "bribery election constitution" as a case study. But the legal documents have been issued, but the constitution is very low and the constitution is discarded or even abandoned. The military valves are more and more sophisticated in playing with the law, and the rule of the bayonets has their rule. However, the so-called election, the so-called congressmen, the so-called Congress, the so-called constitution, is the synonym for the conspiracy, trick and trade, and the whole constitutional environment is finished. The constitution belief of the Chinese people is completely eroded. Again, this chapter reviews the practice of the cabinet system under the separation of the three powers, and points out that the legal system has been eroded and unavailable through the provisional contract, "Yuan Ji" and "bribery constitution", and the responsibility cabinet system is far from the expectation of the Chinese, and the Chinese people's letter to the Constitution The national revolution of "except warlords and civil rights" has become the theme of the political movement.
The fourth chapter is "the cabinet system under the division of five powers". First, this chapter introduces the Kuomintang party governing state power and energy division and the five rights division system. It emphasizes that the party's state system is a renewal of the Chinese constitution culture, and the transformation from individual centralization to group centralization has been realized, and the basic argument of the legitimacy of the regime since the 1911 Revolution is solved. Secondly, this chapter examines the construction of the cabinet system in the period of political training under the party's state system. It first explains the relationship between the party and the government as a prepositional problem, and then examines the debate and practice of the cabinet system before and during the war of resistance against the war of resistance. Finally, it evaluates the establishment of the cabinet system in the period of the political training, and points out the relationship between the Kuomintang and the government. The relationship between the responsible cabinet system in China and the relationship between the administrative court and the legislature do not conform to the requirements of the responsibility cabinet system. As for the supreme Defense Committee in the period of the Anti Japanese War, the administrative power under the conventional bureaucracy has been transformed into its appendage, and the cabinet system has never become a political reality. Again, this chapter examines the debate and practice of the cabinet system under the 46 constitution. 46 the constitution of the Constitution on the historical origin of the form of the form of political organization, and then according to the classic constitutional theory of the 46 constitution of the cabinet under the normative analysis and empirical analysis, the 46 constitution under the "revised" presidential system (or the combination of the combination of presidential and cabinet part of the system) due to the needs of individual centralization In the end, this chapter reviews the cabinet system under the party's state system, and points out that the Kuomintang, after the reorganization, "takes Russia as a teacher", and practices strict party governance, has solved the problem of the legitimacy of the regime, and has carried out extensive organizational mobilization to obtain the national regime; but because of the various reasons and internal and external reasons, it can not realize the revolutionary politics. The transformation of the party to the legal party, the conventional bureaucracy was not thoroughly carried out, and the omnipotent politics collapsed because of the factions, the failure of the military struggle, and the limited responsibility cabinet system failed to establish after all.
The third part is the fifth chapter of this article, which is the conclusion part of this article. First, this chapter summarizes the transition course of the modern Chinese cabinet system, points out the power control of the transition process, the characteristics of the rule of man and the instrumentalism. Secondly, this chapter explores the trend of the transition of the modern Chinese cabinet system by the analysis of legal culture. The cultural gene - the mono - centralization tradition is how to play a decisive role. Since modern times, the monarchy culture sank into the deep thought of the Chinese people. On the surface, it is constitutional law and power to dominate the Chinese behavior pattern. In the form of the Chinese form, it is the principal meaning of the Constitution and the responsible cabinet, in fact, the rule of man and power. Domination. One yuan culture uses the language and the thinking mode to function. The so-called constitution, the government, the election, the government in the modern China become the trade, the trick, the tool's pronoun, the power to the one yuan is the starting point for the Chinese people to design the political organization form and the cornerstone of the thinking construction. Finally, this chapter seeks the wisdom of history according to the previous study, and summarizes the wisdom of the history. Historical experience for the construction of socialist constitutionalism with Chinese characteristics.

【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D691;K25

【参考文献】