再论《治安管理处罚法》上的紧急状态条款——基于2601份裁判文书的体系性分析

Revisiting the Emergency Provisions on the Public Security Administration Punishments Law of the People's Republic of China Based on 2601 Judgment Documents

现行《治安管理处罚法》第50条第1款第1项“拒不执行人民政府在紧急状态情况下依法发布的决定、命令的”在当前修法活动中未获得应有关注,相关研究也大多局限于“法律状态”与“事实状态”的“二分法”分析框架,多采取解释路径,未能充分重视其与《治安管理处罚法》第50条第1款其余三项、第50条第2款之间的内部体系结构及与其他部门法之间的外部体系衔接。通过2601份相关裁判文书的系统梳理和实证分析,《治安管理处罚法》第50条的内部规范体系及其与《刑法》第277条妨害公务罪的外部衔接关系得以浮现,也存在行政执法标准模糊、行刑衔接不畅等问题。基于体系性的定位分析,《治安管理处罚法》第50条第1款第1项中的“政府……发布的决定、命令”具有将公务行为抽象化表达的倾向,进而可以依据抽象公务和具体公务的界分,约束该条款的适用范围,同时采取更为灵活的适用策略以对冲合宪性风险。鉴于该条款在内部性质与外部衔接方面的特殊属性,建议后续考虑独立成款、专门构造的修法思路,以保障条文的体系自洽与适法的规范高效。

The issue of“refusing to implement the decisions and orders issued by the people's government in accordance with the law under a state of emergency”in Article 50 of Public Security Administration Punishments Law has not drawn due attention.An empirical study of 2601 judicial instruments shows the internal normative system of Article 50 of the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments and the connection between its external connection relationship between the crime of obstructing public affairs and Article 277 of the Criminal Law.Form a perspective of administrative and criminal system,it is found that the first paragraph of Article 50 of the Law on Public Security Administration Punishments tends to abstract the expression of official acts,and then the scope of application of this article can be restricted according to the distinction between abstract and concrete public affairs,and more flexible application strategies can be adopted to hedge the constitutional risk.It is suggested that the subsequent consideration of independent and specially constructed revision ideas to ensure that its system is self-consistent with the standard and efficient.