遏制公权与保护私益:社会信用立法论略

On Social Credit Legislation:From the Perspective of Controlling Powers and Protecting Rights

当下,社会信用立法风潮迭起,质疑与责难亦相伴而行。其中一个显见的担忧是,政府以信用管理为名扩张公权侵害私益,最终走向了信用立法的反面。社会信用立法游走于公私两域,无论在价值选择还是在技术规则确立方面,均有相当难度。立法宜将社会信用确立为信息主体履行法定或约定义务的状况,根据信息来源不同,区分为公共信用信息和市场信用信息。立法应遵循合法原则和比例原则,对公共信用信息的主体、归集内容与程序做出合理限制,以给信息主体留下必要的容错空间,最后在审慎确立联动奖惩依据后,遵循关联原则对信息主体进行联动惩戒。信息主体认为其权益受到侵犯的,可以依法主张知情权、异议权、消除权和修复权,甚至在一定情况下可以提起行政复议和行政诉讼。遏制公权、保护私益与权利救济制度的有效性,决定了信息技术运用的广度与深度,也决定了社会治理机制创新的边界。

The legislative efforts on social credit system have been enhancing all these years,while accompanied by questions and blames. One of the great concerns is that the government would,in the name of credit-based management,expand public power and infringe upon private interests,ultimately deviating from the right path of the credit legislation. Social credit legislation runs across both public and private areas,and would definitely encounter difficulties in value selection and establishment of technical rules. The law should define social credit as information of fulfilling legal or contract obligations concerning whom the information attached to,which,based on sources of information,could be divided into public credit information and market credit information. Legislation should follow the principle of legality and proportionality,put some restrictions on public credit information in terms of subjects,contents and procedures so as to leave the necessary fault-tolerant space for someone the information attached to,and prudently exercises related rewards and punishments. The one who considers that its rights and interests have been violated,could claim the right to know,dissent,remove and repair the related information,and even under certain circumstances,could bring the administrative reconsideration and litigation. The effectiveness of curbing public power,protecting private rights interests and the remedies system determines the breadth and depth of the use of information technology and defines the boundaries of social governance innovation.