略论我国反垄断法的宽恕政策

卡特尔是一种普遍存在的严重的垄断行为，如何有效打击卡特尔是反垄断法的重要任务。由于卡特尔都是秘密协商，证据难以被发现，因此反垄断执法机关发现并查处秘密卡特尔的难度很大。为此，许多国家都采取了宽恕政策以鼓励参与卡特尔的经营者主动告发。我国《反垄断法》第46条第二款也引入了此项法律制度，但与其他国家相比，我国的宽恕政策仍然有诸多不完善之处，本文就此提出了进一步完善立法的建议。     

论建立和完善我国出口卡特尔反垄断豁免审查制度

对出口卡特尔豁免适用本国反垄断法是很多国家的通行做法,我国也不例外。对此的规定无疑具有进步性,但其内涵的不确定性和缺乏可操作性是令人担忧的。本文介绍了出口卡特尔的含义、类型及其成因,结合分析其他国家对出口卡特尔的态度和法律规制,提议应当建立我国出口卡特尔反垄断豁免审查制度。为此,作者提出了建立和完善相关制度的框架性建议。     

中国反垄断立法的回顾与展望

中国正在建立和完善各项有关市场竞争的法律法规，特别是反垄断法律制度，作为建立有效竞争制度、保护和促进自由与公平竞争的基础和起点，对於从计划经济向市场经济转轨的国家来说，显得更为重要。笔者就中国反垄断立法涉及的几个主要问题作一些介绍。     

我国反垄断法域外管辖制度初探

反垄断法域外管辖是对国外发生但是对国内市场产生限制、排除竞争影响的垄断行为适用国内反垄断法的制度。反垄断法域外管辖主要集中在国际卡特尔以及跨国并购领域,其本质是要通过反垄断法的域外管辖来规制跨越国界的垄断行为,维护国内市场的竞争秩序以及国家利益。反垄断法在实施域外管辖过程中会引起法律适用冲突。为了避免这种冲突,主要国家达成了反垄断双边合作模式。我国应该与相关国家签署反垄断双边合作协议,采取适合我国国情以及经济发展水平的反垄断法域外管辖制度。     

反垄断宽恕政策的理论分析与实证考察

宽恕政策是卡特尔执法的有效政策工具，它有利于破坏卡特尔的稳定性，有利于提高卡特尔的执法效率。设计合理的规则是宽恕政策有效发挥作用的基础，具体、确定、透明是宽恕政策的基本要求。宽恕政策的实施效果与卡特尔的立法、执法状况密切相关，严厉的法律制裁、坚定的执法态度和有力的执法措施能够有效促进宽恕政策的实施。为了加强卡特尔执法，我国反垄断执法机构应当根据《反垄断法》的有关规定尽快出台宽恕政策。     

反垄断宽恕制度及其中国化

基于经济学上的“囚徒困境”理论,起源于美国的宽恕制度,对于及时发现卡特尔,节省卡特尔案件调查成本,提高反垄断执法效率,维护市场竞争秩序等都具有重要的价值。我国反垄断法虽然也引入了宽恕制度,但相关规定过于抽象,缺乏可操作性,有待进一步完善。     

卡特尔与正当协调的判断标准分析

卡特尔规制是各国反垄断法规制的主要内容之一。在反垄断执法中，如果对市场中所有协调行为均予以违法论处显然不符合竞争政策与公共政策的要求，同时也不能真正有效地制止卡特尔行为。因此，有必要对市场中的卡特尔与正当的协调行为进行有效区分。本文研究、探讨了美欧日卡特尔与正当协调行为的判断标准，以期对完善我国的判断标准提供借鉴。     

从威慑到合规指引 反垄断法实施的新趋势

获取合规承诺是反垄断救济体系的核心,但以惩罚为支撑的简单威慑不能够帮助反垄断执法机构实现上述目标。在反垄断执法实践中,各执法机构普遍采取引导企业自主建立反垄断合规制度的方法来克服威慑陷阱,合规指引已经成为反垄断法实施的一大趋势。反垄断合规制度可以帮助执法机构获取足够的合规承诺,也可以帮助企业预防反垄断法律风险,具有经济上的合理性。"有效"是反垄断合规指引建设的基本目标,制裁与执法、知识、自主合规制度是其倚重的三大支柱。在竞争文化薄弱的中国,执法机构要顺利引领企业建立反垄断合规制度,必须在大力推进竞争文化建设的基础上着力营造积极的政治环境、提升公众对执法公平性的感知、提高执法行为的透明性与确定性。     

中国反垄断立法的现状与问题

市场经济的正常运行 ,需要建立和保持一个有效的竞争政策。中国建立和完善社会主义市场经济体制 ,同样离不开有效的竞争政策。竞争政策的目标与任务就是保护和促进竞争 ,使市场竞争与价格机制发挥有效的调控功能。当然 ,保护和促进竞争政策的目标与任务 ,是在法律的基础上实现的 ,贯彻实施竞争政策的主管部门也要依法行事。因此 ,建立和完善各项有关市场竞争的法律法规 ,特别是反垄断法律制度 ,就成为建立有效竞争制度、保护和促进竞争的基础和起点 ,这对于从计划经济向市场经济转轨的国家来说 ,显得更为重要。中国目前尚无一部专门的反垄断…     

论保护有效竞争的基本方法

就保护有效竞争的方法而言,各国反垄断法在立法体例上早就有行为主义和结构主义之分。其中行为主义反垄断法律制度以重点规范市场行为为基本特征,而结构主义反垄断法律制度以重点规范市场结构(市场集中程度)为基本特征。但从当今各国的反垄断实践来看,他们的选择突出表现为行为主义和结构主义的结合。     

反垄断从宽处理制度及其中国化

Aiming at attracting cartel members to surrender or expose illegal acts of others by reducing or exempting them from public law responsibilities, the leniency program in anti-monopoly law is an effective mechanism throughout the world to discover and crack cartels. The leniency program can be divided into various categories, all of which are based on three preconditions: Filing an application, providing effective information and fully cooperating with anti-monopoly authorities. China has a legal tradition similar to the program as well as legal grounds for establishing such program. However, implementation of the program in China may face potential problems arising from various factors including inner conflicts of the anti-monopoly legal regime, ambiguity of enforcement rights and weakness and lack of administrative law liabilities. Li Junfeng, Ph.D, is a lecturer at Shanghai University, an attorney-at-law, and a legal adviser of Shanghai Entrepreneur Coalition. His major research is on law and economy, competition law and commercial law. He presided or participated some projects funded by Shanghai governmental institutions. He has released over ten articles in academic journals, such as Studies in Comparative Legal Science, Economic Law Forum, Economic Review, etc. His monograph — Research on Private Enforcement of Anti-monopoly Law — is to be published.     

论反垄断法的谦抑性适用——基于总体执法观和具体方法论的分析

反垄断法的谦抑性适用是指在总体执法态度和方法路径上的必要、适度、克制和非冒进的适用姿态。反垄断法执行的理想状态是不枉不纵、恰如其分和精准定位,但这种目标只可尽量接近而又难以企及,因而只能在总体执法效果上退而求其次。由于市场认知的困难性以及市场强大的自愈能力,在次优效果的追求中总体上可以采取必要的"宁纵不枉"的谦抑执法观,以尽量减少错误成本。反垄断法是经济与法律的结合体,经常以经济学分析为体,以法律方法为用,其谦抑性需要进行方法论上的贯彻。反垄断法兼具刚性和柔性,以法律解释为核心的法律方法是调和刚柔的路径与载体,通过谦抑的解释实现刚柔相济。经济学分析是反垄断法执行的重要支撑,但仍有其局限性。执法毕竟涉及"生杀予夺",运用经济学分析应当谨慎和适度,在反垄断法施行初期尤其要防止经济学分析"拜物教"。     

On the Macro Positioning Regarding Anti-Monopoly Considerations Relating to Internet Platform—An Analysis Based on Politics,Policies and Laws

The positioning of anti-monopoly law depends on its unique value, goal and function. From the beginning, anti-monopoly law has had a great political and economic mission, and can become a “super law” with a grand value goal and a powerful function in economic adjustment. The uniqueness of the Internet, in capital, technology and business models, easily allows Internet platforms to grow anarchically, and to have a high correlation with anti-monopoly concerns. Internet anti-monopoly policy should first expand its thinking and elevate its stance in macro value, and seek appropriate legal and economic technical paths. China’s Internet platform anti-monopoly policy cannot simply follow today’s international and superficial trend, which does not contribute to positive experience and may conceal various interests. Instead, China’s Internet platform anti-monopoly policy should actively follow, respect and serve the substantial development interests of China’s digital economy, operating in a timely fashion and at the right location, in ways that are opportune, moderate and modest. It should always be committed to the innovation and development of China’s Internet industry and to international competitiveness. Internet anti-monopoly policy should adhere to the rule of law, build a corresponding rule system, ensure objectivity, neutrality and rationality, and prevent irrationality and over-excitement.     

How Chinese enterprises live in freedom,competition under the rule of law —on the current changes of Corporate Law and Competition Law in China1

China has thoroughly amended its corporate law and hastens to formulate an anti-monopoly law. To rebound then deny the planned economy once adopted, China firmly practices marketization reform. However, common-recognized rules haven t taken shape without sufficient gaming and, lots of quick introduced legislations are only superficial provisions. As the trend of corporate legal system in developed countries, freedom and responsibility are the two contraries but not contradictory directions during the recent reform of China s corporate law. One is deregulation, e.g., introducing one-person company and the transition from approval system to registration system for the establishment of a company; while the other is adding various provisions of responsibility and liability to the Company Law for controlling shareholders, actual controllers, directors, supervisors and top managers. The Anti-Unfair Competition Law of China not only prescribes unfair competition but also counters monopoly. In general, it mainly focuses on anti-monopoly provisions, to popularize the concept and value of free market, making systematic regulations on any kinds of monopoly. This article reviews its background, process, meaning as well as the problems encountered. As there remains somewhat a mystery that China rapidly develops, it may also reflect a fringe of the reason.     

认罪认罚从宽制度的体系性反思与建构

虽然认罪认罚从宽制度是在我国《刑事诉讼法》中得以正式确立的,但《刑事诉讼法》中涉及此制度的具体规定又都是操作层面的。据此,认罪认罚从宽制度的合理性并不能得以阐释。而依据我国《刑法》,对认罪认罚从宽制度的合理性则可以从形式逻辑、实质逻辑以及价值理念三个维度予以充分证成。由此可知,认罪认罚从宽制度本质上系《刑法》中的一种刑罚裁量制度,认罪认罚本质上是法定的从宽量刑情节。在定罪层面,犯罪嫌疑人、被告人只需自愿承认不法事实系其所为,即构成"认罪",而无需准确评价自身行为的法律性质并准确识别具体罪名;在量刑层面,"认罚"考察的重点是犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的悔罪态度和悔罪表现。应当通过刑法立法的方式将认罪认罚从宽制度与自首制度、坦白制度部分重叠地整合在一起,以避免"概念混同""重复评价"的错误倾向。     

The enforcement of china��s anti-monopoly law during the financial crisis: A comparative study

The economic recession throughout the history has always been accompanied by relaxation or abandonment of anti-monopoly laws, but this crisis is not experiencing substantive recession of anti-monopoly law enforcement in major countries and regions. This has mainly resulted from the recognition that anti-monopoly law enforcement could ease adverse effects of economic recovery. Considering China’s short history of anti-monopoly law enforcement and consistent tradition of government intervention in the economy, more strict anti-monopoly law enforcement should be adopted, and more attention should be paid to government-led anti-competitive efforts.     

上下游犯罪“量刑倒挂”困境与“法益恢复”方案——从认罪认罚从宽制度的视角展开

无论是从法哲学视域的公正视角还是司法实践的立场,基于同一笔犯罪事实的前提,“下游犯罪量刑不高于上游犯罪”原则已被普遍承认。然而,由于上游犯罪来源的多样性与下游犯罪的相对单一性特点,司法裁判中上下游犯罪“量刑倒挂”现象时有发生。为了应对这一不合理现象,近年来司法机关在认罪认罚从宽制度的“背书”下,着力探索了一系列方法,主要包括:将自首、坦白情节“可以减轻处罚”的实质条件模糊化并人为主导“减轻处罚”结果,技术化地创设“下游犯罪量刑轻于上游犯罪的主犯但重于从犯”规则,对下游犯罪大量适用非监禁刑。然而,上述方案与认罪认罚从宽制度并无实质关联。事实上,在认罪认罚从宽制度背景下,下游犯罪行为人退赃退赔的“赎罪”抑或“法益恢复”行为可以作为量刑实质从宽的理论根据。具体而言,下游犯罪行为人在上游犯罪案发前的“法益恢复”情形,可以考虑对其“相对不起诉”,在上游犯罪案发后的“法益恢复”情形,可以考虑对其“定罪免刑”。     

民事责任能力范畴分析

民事责任能力是民法中的基础性概念.任何法律关系的主体只要具备民事主体资格,该主体即拥有民事责任能力.民事责任能力隐含在民事权利能力之中,享有民事权利、承担民事义务和民事责任的资格三位一体,构成民事权利能力不可分割的要素.民事主体的民事责任能力状况,与该主体的民事行为能力和认识能力无关.民事责任能力制度贯穿于合同法、侵权法等民法分则的各个组成部分,将其局限于民法分则的任何一部分都是对民事责任能力的不当割裂.