信用惩戒实践的行政法治逻辑:反思与完善

The Logic of Administrative Rule of Law in the Practice of Social Credit Punishment:Reflection and Perfection

信用惩戒面临着失信信息归集标准不一、评价功能异化、公布条件不明以及制裁措施适用失范等方面的问题,这与其旨在克服传统监管手段的缺陷、信用体系建设的急躁冒进和信用惩戒立法的效力层级偏低、内容粗疏不无关系,所以对其进行法治化改造势在必行。首先,要明确其法律依据;其次,应予归集的失信信息须限定为运用现有制裁手段仍不足以实现制裁目的的违法和犯罪行为信息。行政权不宜突破该界限逾越到可由道德调整的领域;失信信息的评价,亦不得侵袭市场的信用决定权。根据信用惩戒的运行机理,只有经过听证、调查和咨询程序认定相对人行为侵犯到一定范围内公共利益的,该信息才可被公布,而包括失信信息公布在内的整个惩戒阶段,则应受关联性原则的调整。

At present,Social Credit Punishment(SCP)is faced with the following problems:different standards in collecting negative credit information,alienation of evaluation function of the information,obscure conditions in publishing the information,difunctional application of punishments and restraints.These reasons can be attributed to the target nature of substituting for traditional regulatory means,the rash advance of construction of Social Credit System,and the low level of effectiveness and the careless content of SCP legislation.It is imperative to improve SCP by rule of law,and the first thing to do is to clarify the legal basis of it.In addition,the information collected should be limited to‘information on illegal and criminal acts that are still insufficient to achieve the purpose by means of existing sanctions’.It is not appropriate for administrative power to break through this limit and go beyond the field that can be adjusted by morality.The evaluation of negative credit information shall not invade the right of social credit decision of market subjects.According to the basic operating mechanism of SCP,the information can only be published if the acts of the counterpart are determined to infringe upon the‘public interest’within a certain range through hearings,investigations and consultation procedures.At last,the whole punishment stage should be adjusted by the Principle of Relevance.