我国证券公司治理缺陷的根源及其出路

导致我国证券公司治理缺陷的根本原因是政府在市场经济发展中的错误定位、"双重身份"下的过度干预及资本市场的行政化等.我国证券公司的治理问题形式上是微观的,而在本质上却是宏观的.完善公司治理的根本措施是加快政府体制改革,合理界定政府与企业、市场的边界,适度分散证券公司股权等.     

Corporate Monitorships and New Governance Regulation: In Theory,in Practice,and in Context

Over the last few years, it has become increasingly common for government agencies to resolve corporate criminal law and securities regulations violations through the use of settlement agreements that require corporations to improve their compliance programs and hire independent monitors to oversee the changes. Based on our interviews with corporate monitors, regulators, and others, we find that these monitorships are failing to meet their full potential in reforming corrupt corporate cultures. After reviewing potential reforms to improve monitorships from a new governance perspective, we discuss the limits of these reforms that are due to the sociological and institutional environment in which monitorships are embedded.     

新型操纵证券市场犯罪的规制困局与破解之策

证券市场交易技术的发展催生了新型操纵证券市场犯罪。面对新型操纵证券市场犯罪,传统规制方式显得力有不逮,面临诸多困局:技术演进与刑法滞后性的矛盾难以消除,信息不对称现象的客观存在使得法律规制效果难以实现,保护技术创新与遏制技术风险的刑法规制“尺度”难以把握。为了破解上述困局,维护证券市场的安全与稳定,有必要改进现有立法模式下的刑法规制授权链条,通过两次授权的方式,进一步明确《刑法》第182条“兜底条款”的内容。将科技监管作为证券交易行政监管的重要手段,建立数据信息共享机制和动态实时监管机制,及时获取准确的数据信息,修补传统事后监管方式的缺陷,实现风险预警。建立操纵证券市场行为的分级治理机制,完善前置法先行和刑法最后保障机制,准确把握刑法规制操纵证券市场行为的恰当时机。证券市场交易技术日新月异,应该在法律制度框架的正确指引和约束下发挥其核心价值,以期充分发挥其功用,并防范其弊端,实现保护技术创新与遏制技术风险之间的平衡。     

The New Collaborative Environmental Governance: The Localization of Regulation

This article examines the new collaborative environmental governance, an enterprise that involves collaboration between a diversity of private, public, and non-government stakeholders who, acting together towards commonly agreed goals, hope to achieve far more collectively, than individually. Such an approach appears to blur the familiar sharp boundaries that separate 'the state' from civil society, yet we still know very little about exactly what this blurring of public and private adds up to, and what its implications are. This new form of governance is examined through the lens of three Australian case studies. Each of these studies involves participatory dialogue, flexibility, inclusiveness, transparency, institutionalized consensus-building practices, and, at least to some extent, a shift from hierarchy to heterarchy. The paper examines the relationships between new and old governance, the architecture of these new initiatives, the role of the state, and the importance of negotiating in 'the shadow of hierarchy'.     

试论我国证券监管的模式

证券监管是金融监管的重要组成部分,金融监管理论同样适用于证券 监管。我国的证券监管工作有待进一步研究和完善,如证监会的法律责任不明确等。 目前,西方国家证券监管有不同模式,我国应借鉴有益经验,在加强证券监管中,注意 从几个方面着手：正确选择制度设计的价值取向;创造良好的制度环境;完善法制建 设;优化监管体制设计。     

New Governance,Old Norms,and the Potential for Corporate Governance Reform

While the new governance approach to corporate governance offers intriguing ideas about participatory governance, it cannot evade the effects of economic self‐interest. This article addresses three nested concerns relating to the potential of new governance in the corporate context, using three specific examples that illustrate the challenges. The first case illustrates that new governance principles cannot be easily integrated with models of corporate governance that rest on the logic of shareholder primary. The second case study offers an example of a new governance type corporation, but illustrates that new governance faces thorny internal structural challenges, given economic incentives and power imbalance. The third example illustrates that even without these normative and structural problems, new governance would face issues arising out of current strategies employed by corporate decision makers to hedge their own personal risk through equity swaps and other derivatives products, which in turn create new incentives for shirking their responsibilities.     

证券式众筹：监管趋势与法律进路

证券式众筹虽为一种新型的互联网融资方式,但仍具有集资性和公众性的双重特点,这表明证券式众筹可能面临擅自发行和欺诈发行证券的风险,故有必要对其进行监管。较之于传统公开发行,域外立法已创新证券式众筹监管理念,并作出相应的制度设计,其监管重点已单纯从发行人信息披露、投资者适当向兼顾投融资限额、投资权利维护转变以及强化中介机构在证券式众筹监管中的作用,此举或许可为我国证券式众筹合法化及其监管制度的确立提供有效借鉴。须创新证券式众筹的监管理念,并分别从发行人、中介机构资格与义务设定以及投资者权利的直接维护来确立证券式众筹监管的法律进路。     

论证券交易所竞争与监管的关系及其定位

多国历史事实和理论推演证明：证券交易所只有在竞争环境下,才会对证券市场进行积极有效的监管,这一监管的动力在于交易所追求收入的最大化。而交易所监管由于具有专业、贴近市场、反应迅速等特点,也是政府监管不可替代的,过于集中的一元化政府监管不利于恰当充分的监管,中国也特别存在着政府监管权力过大和实际监管不到位的问题。中国证券交易所并不处在竞争环境中,监管也不足,并有必要通过多种路径重现其竞争性,以加强其监管能力,包括推动天津柜台交易市场的发展,并有效协调交易所监管与政府监管。而法院仍需保留对交易所监管行为的反垄断审查。     

Nodal Governance, Democracy, and the New 'Denizens'

We begin this paper by reviewing some recent transformations in governance. We then propose three new concepts that we believe assist us in coming to terms with these transformations and the political statuses that have emerged as part of them. These concepts are 'nodal governance', 'denizens', and 'communal space'. Following this we will explore the normative implications of nodal governance as it has taken shape to date, with an emphasis on the 'governance disparity' that is paralleling the 'wealth disparity' across the globe. In response to this disparity, we will end with an outline of a normative vision and practical programme aimed at deepening democracy in poor areas of South Africa, Argentina, and elsewhere. We will argue that the main virtue of nodal governance, namely, the emphasis on local capacity and knowledge can be retrieved, reaffirmed, and reinstitutionalized in ways that enhance the self-direction of poor communities while strengthening their 'collective capital'.     

证券虚假信息规制的原理反思与实证评价

非法定信息披露主体在非法定披露渠道编造或传播证券虚假信息所能引发的后果,应当与法定披露主体在法定披露渠道作出的虚假陈述所能引发的后果相区别。投资者只应对法定披露信息产生合理信赖。我国《证券法》规定的积极和消极披露义务主体均为对市场有影响力的特定人,但证监会在规则制定和执法中将之进行扩张解释,值得检讨。对虚假信息责任的追究,应在主体上坚持有市场影响力的特殊主体标准,同时在客体上坚持事实性信息虚假且具有重大性的标准。这样方符合《证券法》的本意,也与对法定信息披露义务人的虚假陈述责任制度相匹配。否则意味着推定投资者对普通主体随意作出的不实言论也能产生合理信赖,这有碍于证券信息规制的正面建设。对证券虚假信息的治理,不应依靠公法责任的强化,而应依靠社会化的综合治理,包括加强投资者教育,凸显法定信息披露渠道的权威性等。     

政府监管的缺陷与证券监管的适度性分析

对证券业的监管说到底就是政府干预社会经济在证券业中的体现 ,然而 ,政府干预 (或称政府监管 )在其运行过程中 ,本身是会存在缺陷的。本文试图通过对政府监管缺陷和证券市场法律监管负成本的分析 ,从而阐明政府对证券市场监管适度性的把握。     

人工智能时代的算法规制:责任分层与义务合规

通过云端搜集、校勘、分析海量大数据,独立法律人格待定的智能机器人,透过算法活动,在多个行业替代自然人从事高精尖业务并重塑人们的社会评价、权利义务及法律责任。算法活动以“信义义务”为核心调整传统受托人关系以及基于合同相对性进行损害赔偿,传统制度已不能完全囊括智能主体理应承担的所有义务,导致算法操纵、信息寻租和监管套利的三重失控,凸显人工智能产业布局中的法律规范缺位;算法妨害具有公共属性,穿透技术黑箱对合同之外的普罗大众造成“公共滋扰”,法律应当为不同潜在责任主体创设不同缺省合规义务,引导算法运营商、技术开发方内部化不合理社会成本,以构建人工智能责任体系的中国标准。     

公共治理视域下自动化应用的法律规制

技术飞跃与治理提升之间的关联通常被假定,也早已被吸纳进“数字中国”“智慧社会”等政策实践,但法律的习惯性滞后带来了监管套利的空间。公共治理领域的自动化应用经历了从基于数据库编码的计算机自动化到基于机器学习的算法自动化再到基于神经网络的超级自动化的逐步跃迁,从早先自下而上专业人士的“辅助/参考”和个别部门的“部署/应用”嬗变为自上而下的社会化“嵌入/集成”,公权力、私权力及私权利的关系发生了结构性转换。相应地,国际通行、日益趋同的个人隐私保护(事前同意)、算法可解释性(事中监测)和完整履责链条(事后追责)的监管范式也应依照宏观技术共治、中观价值位阶和微观权利保障三位一体的规制路径进行体系化重构。     

作为规制与治理工具的行政许可

源于私人生活中财产权人授权他人分享自己财产权实践的行政许可,正成为一种引人注目的政府规制与治理工具。作为治理工具,行政许可承载了一系列不同的社会目标,规制有时只是其中一个主要目标。当行政许可被限定为规制工具时,可以假定其核心是实现对特定行为的控制,具体机制包括信息收集、准入控制、行为监管以及许可的执行。尽管许可制度具有筛选市场主体并对他们进行识别和规制等积极作用,但同时也存在巨大的负面作用,如限制和阻碍竞争、可能导致权力滥用,而且许可制度是有成本的。政府在采取许可制度过程中,应考虑其他能够达成相同制度目标的替代性工具。     

信息不完全——对证券公开规制的一种经济分析

信息不完全是市场机制与生俱来的内在缺陷 ,它在证券这一特定“产品”的交易过程中得到更加充分地显现。公开规制作为国家干预证券市场的特定形式 ,恰是克服信息不完全的一种有效的制度选择。