执行和解的应然制度逻辑阐释

Interpretation of Institutional Logic of Enforcement Reconciliation

作为回应中国实践需要的产物,法规范层面的执行和解从执行措施转向一般规定,变化主要是当事人不履行执行和解协议时对申请执行人权利救济路径的设计,且该路径在《民事强制执行法》制定过程中再次发生摇摆。合理阐释执行和解的应然制度逻辑应回归法律关系这一法学基本理论范畴,立足法规范解析执行和解动态过程中不同环节所蕴含的法律关系,在区分“权利与义务关系”和“权力与责任关系”的基础上,明确执行和解协议的内容应以当事人自主安排生效法律文书确定权利的实现为边界,限于变更履行标的额、履行方式、履行期限与地点,由此在执行和解协议不履行时,申请执行人权利的救济路径理应是申请恢复执行原生效法律文书。

In response to the practical needs of China,the reconciliation of enforcement at the legal normative level has shifted from enforcement measures to general provisions.The main change is the design of the relief path for the applicant’s rights when the parties fail to fulfill the reconciliation agreement,and this path has once again balanced in the process of formulating the Civil Enforcement Law.A reasonable explanation of institutional logic for the reconciliation of enforcement should return to the basic theory of legal relations,analyzing the relationships contained in different stages of the dynamic process of reconciliation,distinguishing the relationship between right vs.Duty and power vs.liability based on legal norms.On this basis,it is necessary to clarify that the content of the reconciliation agreement should be based on the realization of rights determined by legal documents as the boundary,and the scope of self-arrangement by both parties is merely limited to changing the amount of performance subject,performance method,performance period and location.Therefore,when the reconciliation agreement is not fulfilled,the relief for the applicant’s rights should be to apply for resumption of enforcement of the original effective legal document.