期刊文献+

我国煤矿安全法规体系的现状及展望 被引量:20

Current Situation and Prospect of Coal Mine Safety Regulation System in China
下载PDF
导出
摘要 我国煤矿安全立法经历了古代、近代和新中国成立之后3个不同时期,每一个时期都形成了关于煤矿安全的法规体系。目前,我国已经建立起完备的煤矿安全法规体系,确立了齐全的煤矿安全基础制度体系。但是,我国煤矿安全法规体系仍存在部分法律法规内容陈旧、市场急需标准缺位滞后、核心行政法规未能及时细化落实《安全生产法》相关要求、煤矿安全监管监察职责定位不清、法律法规之间矛盾冲突,以及企业法律责任较轻等问题。结合新时代全面依法治国的新特征新要求,我国煤矿安全法规体系应坚持以人为本、以保障矿工生命安全为核心、加快立改废释、强化企业法律责任等基本发展思路。 China’s legislation on coal mine safety has gone through three different periods,ancient,modern and after the founding of new China,each of which has formed a legal system on coal mine safety.At present,China has established a complete system of coal mine safety regulations and a complete basic system of coal mine safety.However,for coal mine safety regulation system in our country,there are still some problems:some laws and regulations with outdated contents,the absence of market urgently needed standards,the failure of timely refinement and implementation of the Production Safety Law,the unclear orientation of coal mine safety supervision and supervision responsibility,the contradiction and conflict between laws and regulations,and the light legal responsibility of enterprises.In view of the new characteristics and requirements of comprehensively governing the country by law in the new era,China’s coal mine safety laws and regulations should adhere to the basic development ideas,such as putting people first,ensuring the safety of miners’lives as the core,speeding up the legislation,reform,abolishment and interpretation,and strengthening the legal responsibility of enterprises.
作者 张文杰 黄体伟 ZHANG Wenjie;HUANG Tiwei(National Coal Mine Safety Administration,Beijing 100713,China)
出处 《煤矿安全》 CAS 北大核心 2020年第10期10-17,共8页 Safety in Coal Mines
关键词 煤矿 安全管理 法规标准 监管监察 法规体系 coal mine safety management regulations and standards supervision and supervision legal system
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献66

  • 1.《共同纲领》.第32条[Z].,..
  • 2国务院.《煤矿安全监察管理体制改革实施方案》[Z].,..
  • 3.《宪法》第91条.1954[Z].,..
  • 4《牛津法律大辞典》.光明日报出版社1998年版.
  • 5Wils. K.B. 205, 95 Eng. R.ep. 768 (C.P. 1763).
  • 6Genay v. Norris ,1 S.C.L. 3,1 Bay6 (1784).
  • 7Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 119 Cal. App. 3d 757, 174 Cat. Rptr. 348 (1981).
  • 8Malzof v. Uited States, 112 S.Ct.711,715(1992).
  • 9Michael Rustad & Thomas Koenig, The Supreme Court and Junk Social Science : Selective Distortion in Amicus Briefs , 72 N.C.L. Rev. 91 (1993).
  • 10Stephen Daniels & Joanne Martin, Myth a' nd Reality in Punitive Damages, 75 Minn. L. Rev. 1, 31 (1990).

共引文献434

同被引文献231

引证文献20

二级引证文献71

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部