国家作为民事主体的问题探讨

发布时间：2018-06-26 18:58

本文选题：国家的双重身份 + 国家所有权　；参考：《西南政法大学》2007年硕士论文

【摘要】： 国家具有双重身份，一方面国家作为公法主体，参加宪法、刑法、行政法、经济法、诉讼法等公法法律关系，行使行政管理职能、经济管理职能、审判职能等；另一方面国家又作为“民事主体”，参加民法、商法等私法法律关系，实施经营活动，参与市场竞争。作为公法主体的国家，是法律法规和各项政策的制定者、实施者，是享有庞大的行政权力，高高在上的管理者；而作为“民事主体”的国家，则是市场竞争的参与者，经济活动的被管理者，必须遵循法律法规、政策和市场活动规则，与自然人、法人处在平等的地位上。这就不可避免地会经常出现国家集“裁判员”与“运动员”于一身，既是游戏规则制定者，又是游戏参与者的双重身份窘境。拥有强大公权力的国家在参与民事活动时，很难与其他民事主体保持平等的法律地位，而总能轻易地借助公权力，过度地干涉和介入私权领域，损害相对人的合法权益。无论在理论上或者实践中，国家的公法主体和私法(民事)主体这两种身份都没有合理、明确的界限划分，重叠混同并任意置换，这一问题在我国长期、广泛、严重的存在。国家应否作为民事主体，国家又能否作为民事主体，妥善解决这一问题对市场经济的健康发展有着极其重要的现实意义，在我国完善社会主义市场经济的今天具有更重要的意义。论文《国家作为民事主体的问题探讨》限于内国法领域，从解决国家所有权性质的问题入手，就国家实际参与民事经济生活的主要情况(包括政府采购、发行国债和国家赔偿等)展开分析，探讨国家民事主体身份的存在是否有其必要性和可行性。除引言外，论文正文分为四个部分。引言简单勾画了我国现行民事主体制度的概况，从国家集“裁判员”与“运动员”于一身的双重身份窘境，引出了本文将要阐明的中心问题。第一部分，国家、国家主体概念分析及民事主体确立之标准。国家既是主权享有者，又是财产所有者，随着国家社会职能的实现与完善，国家深入社会经济生活的广泛化，除了在行政法以及经济法领域充当主体，部分学者提出国家主体亦可在其他领域，例如民事领域充当主体。关于国家作为民事主体的学说，主要分为两大类，一类将国家作为公法人，一类则将国家视作特殊的民事主体。前者混淆了国家与法人的本质区别，后者则无法妥善地解决国家如何在享有其所谓“特殊”的民事权利能力和民事行为能力的同时保证民事活动的主体平等这一问题。回溯民事主体制度的发展历史，我们能够发现法律赋予某一社会存在以民事主体资格的关键在于其是否能对社会的发展和进步发挥功能作用。而国家应否又能否以民事主体之身份介入社会经济生活，将在下个部分一一论述。第二部分，国家作为“民事主体”的若干情况分析。学界普遍认为，国家充当“民事主体”，参与民事法律关系，主要是在所有权关系、债权关系、损害赔偿关系这三个领域。在所有权领域，国家所有权的客体主要分为经营性财产以及自然资源、公有物和公用物。就前者而言，尽管经营性财产所有权在行使过程的最后一环表现为公司法人财产权，但国家财产所有权的主体仍是国家，目的仍是为社会服务，也必须根据以民主规则形成的全民意志来行使，其权力的属性同样也未发生改变，究其实质仍是公权而非私权。而后者作为国家公产，国家对其行使的所有权并非民事权利，而是政治权力。将国家所有权定性为公权而非私权，符合其权利的性质，也符合其权利存在的实际状况。在债权关系领域，国家作为债权人或者债务人，主要是政府采购和发行国债。公共管理性及非赢利性是政府采购的基本属性，政府采购行为实质上是一种行政合同行为，同私法合同区别开来。虽然政府采购具有民事行为和行政行为的双重性质，但其属性仍侧重于行政行为的属性，总体上仍属于行政行为的范畴。就发行国债而言，其目的是为国家筹集必要的建设资金，以使财政政策获得融资和技术上的支持，具有进行适度宏观调控的能力，迥异于以获利为目的之普通债权债务关系。不一样的目的使得发行国债更多地受到公法规制，应受公法基本原则的拘束，包括平等原则、公益原则及比例原则等。国债法律关系的债务人是作为公权力主体的国家，其借贷的信用基础又是根源自能够无偿(指不直接提供对待给付而言)征收税收的公权力，因此当事人之间的地位，在实质上其实并不平等，并非纯粹的私法契约关系。在国家赔偿关系领域，对国家赔偿责任的性质存在着代位责任说与自己责任说之争。我国国家赔偿法名不副实，并未将“国家”这个公法主体纳入到赔偿主体之中，真正承担责任的是“国家机关”而非“国家”。国家赔偿与民事赔偿存在着质的区别，国家赔偿立法也已脱离民法而自成体系，国家赔偿法呈现出明显公法特性，是一部实实在在的公法；同时，“国家”并非国家赔偿制度一方的责任主体，国家承担的是一种代位责任，，真正的责任主体是国家公务人员以及赔偿义务机关。第三部分，从宪法、行政法角度探究国家主体之角色定位。国家从其出现之初，就是政治意义上的主权实体。而市民社会则纯粹是在国家之外存在的仅仅关注个体利益的独立领域。作为公法主体的国家，不能随意涉足市民社会，只能在公共领域活动。当公共利益需要时，才能以体现公共意志和利益的国家权力介入市民社会，对市民社会进行调节。作为公法主体的国家，应使自身适应市场经济和谐、高效、经济、有序构建和快速发展的要求，主要利用经济、法律手段对宏观经济和市场运行进行调控，既不宜过度采用强制性且无约束的行政手段，也不宜以民事主体身份直接介入市民社会，因其背后强大的公法主体身份对正常的平等的市场秩序产生不利影响，同时也有损国家自身的公法权威。第四部分，国家不应作为民事主体之法律分析。国家充当“民事主体”既不具备可行性，也不具备必要性。当代中国国家定位应是公法主体，这才符合现实情况的需要。任由国家集“裁判员”与“运动员”于一身的情况发展下去，将破坏市民社会的平等和谐，有损于市场经济的健康发展。在国家的双重身份造成了严重困境的情况下，妥善处理这一重大问题的最佳方式即全面否定国家的民事主体地位，明确国家的公法主体定位。国家作为“民事主体”不仅是私法上的问题，也是宪法、行政法等公法应该探讨的区域，这涉及到国家与社会、与个人、与行政机构等的多重关系，在理论上会是一个复杂、庞大的体系，在实践中也必将是一个长期、艰巨的工程。在探求现行法同现行架构保持契合，形成一个和谐、严谨、完备的法律体系的同时，采取相应措施避免国家双重身份可能导致的各种弊端，促进国家和社会和谐发展，平衡国家利益、社会利益以及个人利益，是我们需要关注和进一步探讨的。
[Abstract]:The state has dual identity. On the one hand, the state, as the main body of public law, takes part in the legal relations of the constitution, the criminal law, the administrative law, the economic law and the litigation law, and exercises the administrative function, the economic management function, the judicial function, etc. on the other hand, the state acts as a "civil subject", and takes part in the legal relations of civil law, commercial law and other private law, and implements business activities, Participating in the market competition. As the main body of the public law, the country is the law and regulation and the policy makers, the implementers, the executives who enjoy the huge administrative power and the high level of management; and as the "civil subject", they are the participants of the market competition, and the managers of the economic activities must follow the laws, regulations, policies and market activities. The rule of motion is on an equal footing with the natural person and the legal person. It is inevitable that there will inevitably be a state of "referees" and "athletes", which are both the rulers of the game and the double identities of the players. With equal legal status, it is always easy to use public power to interfere and intervene in the field of private rights easily and harm the legitimate rights and interests of the relative people. No matter in theory or in practice, the two identities of the state's public law subject and the private law (Civil) subject have no reasonable, clearly defined boundary division, overlap and arbitrary replacement, this problem For a long time, extensive and serious existence in China, whether the state should be a civil subject or whether the state can be a civil subject is of great practical significance to the healthy development of the market economy, and has a more important significance in improving the socialist market economy in our country.
The discussion of the issue of the state as a civil subject is limited to the field of internal state law, starting with the problem of solving the nature of the state's ownership, analyzing the state's actual participation in the civil economic life (including government procurement, issuing treasury bonds and state compensation etc.) to discuss whether the existence of the civil subject identity of the country is necessary and possible. In addition to the introduction, the main body of the thesis is divided into four parts.
The introduction briefly outlines the current situation of the current civil subject system in China. From the dual status dilemma of "referee" and "athlete" in China, the central issue will be clarified.
The first part, the state, the national subject concept analysis and the standards for the establishment of the civil subject. The state is both the sovereign and the property owner. With the realization and improvement of the state's social functions, the state will deepen the extensive social and economic life. In addition to being the main body in the administrative law and the economic law, some scholars have proposed the national subject as well. In other fields, such as the subject of civil field, the theory about the state as a civil subject is divided into two main categories: one takes the state as a public law person, the other regards the country as a special civil subject. The former confuses the essential distinction between the state and the legal person, and the latter can not properly solve the state how to enjoy its so-called "special" The issue of civil rights and capacity for civil action ensures the subject equality of civil activities. Back to the history of the development of the civil subject system, we can find that the key to the existence of a civil subject by law is whether it can play a functional role in the development and progress of the society. And the state should be able to play a functional role. Whether or not it can intervene in social and economic life as a civil subject will be discussed in the next part.
The second part, the state as the "civil subject" analysis of a number of situations, the academic community generally believes that the state acts as a "civil subject" and participates in civil legal relations, mainly in the three fields of ownership, creditor's rights, and damage compensation. In the field of ownership, the object of the state ownership is mainly divided into business property and nature. Resource, public property and public property. As far as the former is concerned, although the last part of the process of exercising property ownership is the corporate property right of the company, the main body of the state property ownership remains the state, the purpose is to serve the society, and it must be exercised according to the will of the democratic rule, and the property of its power is also the same. In the absence of change, the essence is still public power rather than private right. As a state public property, the latter is not a civil right, but a political power, which is exercised by the state. The state ownership is defined as a public right rather than a private right. It conforms to the nature of its rights and is in line with the actual situation of its rights. In the field of creditor's rights, the state acts as a debt. The right person or the debtor, mainly the government procurement and the issuance of national debt. Public management and non profit are the basic attributes of government procurement. The behavior of government procurement is essentially an administrative contract, which is different from the private law contract. Although the government procurement has the dual nature of civil behavior and administrative behavior, its attributes are still focused on the practice. The attribute of political behavior, in general, still belongs to the category of administrative behavior. The purpose of issuing national debt is to raise the necessary construction funds for the state in order to make financial policy obtain financing and technical support, and have the ability to carry out moderate macro regulation and control, which is very different from the common creditor's debt relationship with the purpose of profit. The issuance of treasury bonds is regulated more by public law and should be restrained by the basic principles of public law, including the principle of equality, the principle of public welfare and the principle of proportionality. The debtor of the legal relationship of national debt is the country of the main body of public power, and the credit basis of the loan is the public tax of the source from which it can not be paid directly. As a result, the status of the parties, in fact, is essentially unequal, not a purely private contractual relationship. In the field of state compensation relations, the nature of the state's liability for compensation is contended with the doctrine of subrogation and its own responsibility. The State Compensation Law of our country is not true, and does not bring the subject of the "state" the public law into compensation. Among the subjects, the real responsibility is "state organs" rather than "state". There is a qualitative difference between state compensation and civil compensation. The state compensation legislation has also been separated from the civil law. The State Compensation Law presents a clear public law characteristic and is a real public law. At the same time, the "state" is not a state compensation system. The main body of responsibility is the subrogation responsibility of the state, and the real responsible body is the state civil servants and the organ of compensatory obligations.
The third part, from the angle of the Constitution and the administrative law, explores the role orientation of the State subject. From the beginning of its appearance, the state is the sovereign entity in the political sense, while the civil society is purely an independent field of concern for the individual interests outside the state. When the public interest is needed, it is necessary to intervene in the civil society and regulate the civil society by the state power that embodies the public will and interests. As the main body of the public law, the state should adapt itself to the requirements of the harmonious, efficient, economic, orderly construction and rapid development of the market economy, and mainly use the economy and legal means to the macro economy. To regulate and control the market operation, it is not suitable for excessive use of compulsory and unconstrained administrative means, and it is not suitable for civil society to directly intervene in civil society, because the strong public law main body behind it has adverse effect on the normal and equal market order, and also detrimental to the public law authority of the state itself.
The fourth part, the state should not be the legal analysis of the civil subject. It is not feasible and necessary for the state to act as a "civil subject". The state of the country should be the subject of public law in contemporary China, which is in line with the needs of the reality. The equality and harmony of the civil society detrimental to the healthy development of the market economy. Under the circumstances of the double identity of the state, the best way to properly deal with this major problem is to completely negate the state's civil subject status and to make clear the position of the state's public law subject. It is also a region which should be discussed by the public law such as the Constitution and the administrative law. This involves the multiple relations between the state and the society, the individual and the administrative institution. In theory it will be a complex and huge system, and in practice it will also be a long-term and arduous project. At the same time, we should pay attention to and further discuss the complete legal system and take corresponding measures to avoid various malpractices that may lead to the state's dual identity, promote the harmonious development of the state and society, and balance the interests of the state, the social interests and the individual interests.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：D913

【引证文献】