我国立法后评估的主体研究

发布时间：2018-04-23 13:22

本文选题：立法后评估 + 评估主体　；参考：《中国海洋大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国的立法机关长期以来只重视法律法规的制定，对法律法规出台后的实效问题则关注不够。随着我国法律体系的初步建成，立法工作的重心逐渐从过去强调法律的制定向法律的修改、完善和废止过渡。立法后评估正是在这种新形势的要求下产生的。近些年来，上从全国人大常委会，下至各地权力机关都在积极试点“立法后评估”的工作。丰富的立法后评估实践引起了法学界以及立法学界的广泛关注，对研究此制度的价值都有一定的认同。本文以实践中中央以及各地的立法后评估实践为切入点，关注各地在评估实践中对评估主体组成方式选择的相似与差异，期望在对立法后评估主体的相关理论进行分析的基础上，比较与借鉴国外法治发达国家立法后评估主体的发展轨迹和组成特点，以期为立法后评估实践的更好开展探索出更为科学与具有可行性的评估主体模式。本文导言部分简要介绍了一下选题的研究背景与意义，为下文的论述奠定了理论基础。另外还介绍了作者的研究思路与方法，尝试通过传统的文献与比较研究法的同时，运用实证与跨学科等多种研究方法，强化本文的论证说明。除导言外，正文共分五大部分，结构如下：第一章介绍了立法后评估主体的一般理论。第一节主要从语义学和法学理论出发定义了立法后评估主体模式的概念，阐释了立法后评估主体的具体含义。第二节主要介绍了确定立法后评估主体的意义，为什么要建立立法后评估主体制度。第三节从立法后评估制度的定位、评估主体的资格、能力、构成四个方面来论述影响科学的评估主体模式的因素。第二章通过实证分析的方法介绍了国外立法后评估的主体模式。主要介绍了美国、英国、瑞士、日本及韩国的评估主体模式的变迁过程和特点，，并在分析国外立法后评估的基础上指出其的优缺点和借鉴意义等问题。第三章着眼于我国的现状，说明我国目前的立法后评估主体的模式，并且对我国目前立法后评估主体的模式进行价值倾向性的分析，在此基础上可以看到我国立法后评估主体的不足。第四章主要介绍我国立法后评估主体的完善路径，首先是要完善内部评估主体，其次就是要保障利害关系人参与实质性评估，再就是要发动社会力量参与到评估之中来。第五章主要提出了构建我国立法后评估主体的构想，首先分析了第三方立法后评估的逻辑起点，再就是分析了第三方主体的重要性，其次就是分析了我国第三方评估主体的存在基础，最后分析了我国第三方评估主体的构建问题。
[Abstract]:For a long time, the legislatures of our country only pay attention to the formulation of laws and regulations, but they pay less attention to the actual effect of laws and regulations. With the initial establishment of the legal system in China, the focus of legislative work has gradually shifted from emphasizing the legal system to the revision of the law, perfecting and repealing it. The post-legislative evaluation is under the request of this new situation. In recent years, from the standing Committee of the National people's Congress to the local authorities are actively pilot "after-legislation evaluation" work. The rich practice of post-legislative evaluation has aroused widespread concern in the field of law and legislation, and has a certain recognition of the value of the study of this system. Based on the practice of central and local post-legislative evaluation, this paper focuses on the similarities and differences in the selection of the assessment subject in the assessment practice. Based on the analysis of the relevant theories of the post-legislative evaluation subject, this paper compares and draws lessons from the development track and composition characteristics of the post-legislative evaluation subject in developed countries with the rule of law in foreign countries. The purpose is to explore a more scientific and feasible evaluation subject model for the better development of post-legislative evaluation practice. The introduction of this paper briefly introduces the research background and significance of the topic, which lays a theoretical foundation for the following discussion. In addition, this paper introduces the author's research ideas and methods, and tries to strengthen the demonstration and explanation of this paper by means of the traditional literature and comparative research methods and by using many kinds of research methods, such as empirical and interdisciplinary research methods. In addition to the introduction, the text is divided into five parts, the structure of which is as follows: The first chapter introduces the general theory of the subject of post-legislative evaluation. The first section mainly defines the concept of the model of post-legislative evaluation from the perspective of semantics and legal theory, and explains the concrete meaning of the post-legislative evaluation. The second section mainly introduces the significance of determining the subject of post-legislative evaluation and why the system of post-evaluation subject of legislation should be established. The third section discusses the factors that affect the scientific evaluation subject model from four aspects: the orientation of the post-legislative evaluation system, the qualification and the ability of the evaluation subject. The second chapter introduces the main model of foreign post-legislative evaluation by empirical analysis. This paper mainly introduces the changing process and characteristics of the evaluation subject model of the United States, Britain, Switzerland, Japan and South Korea, and points out its advantages and disadvantages and the significance of reference on the basis of analyzing the post-legislation evaluation of foreign countries. The third chapter focuses on the current situation of our country, explains the current mode of post-legislative evaluation of our country, and analyzes the value orientation of the current mode of post-legislative evaluation of our country. On this basis, we can see the deficiency of the subject after legislation in our country. The fourth chapter mainly introduces the perfect path of the evaluation subject after legislation in our country, first of all, to perfect the internal evaluation subject, secondly, to ensure the stakeholders to participate in the substantive evaluation, and then to mobilize the social forces to participate in the evaluation. The fifth chapter mainly puts forward the idea of constructing the subject of the post-legislative evaluation in China. Firstly, it analyzes the logical starting point of the post-evaluation of the third-party legislation, and then analyzes the importance of the third-party subject. Secondly, it analyzes the existence basis of the third party evaluation subject in our country, and finally analyzes the construction problem of the third party evaluation subject in our country.
【学位授予单位】：中国海洋大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D920.0

【相似文献】