企业行政合规论纲

An Outline of Corporate Administrative Compliance

在依法行政的规范框架之内,我国行政机关面临愈发凸显的合法性困境和威慑力陷阱,“罚不下去”的个案正义需求多发,这为能够合法解构依法行政、强化企业自我治理的行政合规制度,提供了巨大的制度动力。并且,相较于刑事合规而言,行政合规还可以凭借行政执法和解的传统资源、新《行政处罚法》中的主观过错条款等等,获得更为有利的制度空间和推广通道。然而,行政合规同时也面临着极具挑战性的理论争议和实践障碍,“行政权的不可处分性”“企业独立意志的缺乏”“法律认识上的客观障碍”“法律责任的合规落空”等等,都是行政合规必须正面回应的独有问题。对此,既需要适当转变法教义学的严谨立场,以行政合规化解传统理论缺陷,也需要对《行政处罚法》中的主观过错条款进行目的性限缩解释,明确主观过错的定罚角色,从而赋予行政合规合法性和正当性。

Administrative agencies face increasingly prominent legitimacy dilemma and deterrence trap within the normative framework of administration according to law.There is often a demand for justice in cases that should not be punished,which provides a huge institutional impetus for the legal deconstruction of administration by law and the strengthening of the administrative compliance system of enterprises’self-governance.In addition,compared with criminal compliance,administrative compliance can also obtain more favorable system space and promotion channel by relying on the traditional resources of administrative enforcement reconciliation and the subjective fault clause in the new Administrative Punishment Law.However,administrative compliance is also confronted with extremely challenging theoretical disputes and practical obstacles,such as the indisposition of administrative power,the lack of independent will of enterprises,the objective obstacle of legal understanding,the failure of legal liability compliance and so on,which are unique problems that administrative compliance must respond to positively.In this regard,it is necessary to change the strict position of legal dogmatics properly and resolve the defects of traditional theory with administrative compliance.At the same time,it is necessary to interpret the subjective fault clause in the Administrative Punishment Law with the purposive limiting methods and clarify the penalty role of subjective fault,so as to give legality and legitimacy to administrative compliance.