处罚法定视野下失信惩戒的规范进路

在新《行政处罚法》增设行政处罚定义条款的背景下,大部分失信惩戒措施都可以纳入行政处罚范畴。处罚法定原则是规范行政处罚的关键技术,现行失信惩戒制度在要件、效果、程序等维度上皆不同程度偏离了处罚法定原则,亟需纠偏。在要件法定层面,应对失信概念进行类型化提炼、拼接失信构成要件的规范分离,并增设主观过错要素;在效果法定层面,失信惩戒的设定应恪守法律保留、建立失信行为与惩戒措施的匹配规则,并在"一事不再罚"框架内实施惩戒;在程序法定层面,信息归集程序应符合《民法典》《个人信息保护法》设定的信息处理规则,处罚决定程序须在自动化处理和人工介入之间求得平衡并合理限定追究时效,信用修复程序则应完善修复条件,以及引入"信息修复"制度。

Normative Approach to the Dishonesty Punishment in Light of Prescribed Administrative Punishment

Under the background of adding the definition of administrative penalty in the new Law of The People’s Republic of China on Administrative Penalty, most of the disciplinary measures for trust-breaking can be included in the category of administrative penalties. The Principle of Legally Prescribed Penalty is the key technology to standardize administrative penalties. The current punishment system for trustbreaking deviates from the Principle of Legally Prescribed Penalty to varying degrees in the constitutive elements, legal effects, procedures and other dimensions, which is in urgent need of correction. At the level of constitutive requirement, the concept of trust-breaking should be typed and refined, the standard separation of constitutive elements of trust-breaking should be spliced, and subjective fault elements should be added. At the level of legal effect, the establishment of punishment for trust-breaking should abide by legal reservation, establish the matching rules between trust-breaking behavior and punishment measures, and implement punishment within the framework of "non-repeated penalty". At the procedure level, the program information collection procedures shall conform to the information processing rules setting by Civil Code of and Personal Information Protection Law, balance the penalty decision procedure between automatic processing and human intervention, reasonable limit for aging, credit repair procedures should be perfect repair condition and the introduction of "repair" information system.