頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 民營化後國家影響與管制義務之理論與實踐--以組織私法化與任務私人化之基本型為中心=Regulatory Duties of Government after Privatization;Organizational Privatization and True Privatization as Focus |
---|---|
作 者 | 詹鎮榮; | 書刊名 | 東吳法律學報 |
卷 期 | 15:1 2003.08[民92.08] |
頁 次 | 頁1-40 |
分類號 | 553.61 |
關鍵詞 | 民營化; 組織私法化; 公營事業; 影響義務; 行政公司法; 任務私人化; 國家保障責任; 管制義務; 管制革新; 電信法; Privatization; Organizational privatization; Government-owned companies; Influence duties; Verwaltungsgesellschaftsrecht; True privatization; Governmental guaranty responsibilities; Regulatory duties; Regulation reform; Telecommunications law; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 民營化為一歷程性之概念,因實施階段之不同,所涉及之法律問題亦隨之而異。就「後民營化」階段而言,法學上所關切者,主要在於國家是否應保留有「必要之剩餘責任」,以及該等責任如何在法制上予以實踐之問題。本文僅擷取民營化類型光譜中之兩極點基本型,作為研究之客體。首先,在單純之組織私法化情形,行政任務之執行責任依舊保留於國家自己身上;國家作為執行者之角色,未予更迭。尤其基於國家行為須具充分民主正當性之要求,母體行政組織對其所管政府獨資公司之決策形成與業務執行,具有一憲法位階之「影響義務」。就我國立法例而言,除有國營事業管理法作為母體行政組織影響措施之一般法規範基礎外,針對個別公營公司尚慣於另以專法為特別規定。透過人事、業務,以及財務等方面之核定與監督權保留,以貫徹民主正當性與法治國家公益維繫之要求。至於在任務完全私人化之民營化情形,國家本於社會國理念之促進與人權之保護義務,形成一保障責任。此等民營化後之國家保障責任,尤其體現在保障基礎設施與促進公平競爭兩項目標上,並且透過各種管制手段之採行而獲得實踐。現行電信法即屬電信自由化與民營化後,國家管制義務具體化之典範。民營化並非意味著國家責任之完全退縮與放棄,毋寧基於立憲主義國家憲法之要求,在民營化後,國家仍應保留有不同類型與密度之影響與管制義務。 |
英文摘要 | Generally the term “privatization" has been defined as a “process" aimed at shifting functions and responsibilities from the government to the private sector. This study takes the phase “After Privatization" as its topic. From the legal viewpoint it's necessary to discuss, whether privatization causes the exemption of government from all responsibilities or not. In case of organizational privatization, where a government-owned enterprise is reorganized to a company form, the government is always obliged to control und influence the privatized company. The constitutional basis of government regulation is the principle of democracy and the rule of law. On the level of administrative law, the government controls and influences the main activities in company such as personnel, financial and operative affairs. Turning the other case: once a public service which may have some monopoly characteristics has been shifted from the government to the private sector, government regulation is needed until a ful1y competitive market has developed. Besides that, it's also needed to maintain the Universal Service Obligation. True privatization doesn't mean government deregulation. What has been changed is just the “type" of governmental responsibility, not the exemption of government from all regulatory duties and responsibilities. In constitution, the government shall be always responsible for promoting public interests and protecting human rights from any private intrusion. After privatization, the role of government has changed to a “regulator" who should regulate private service providers' activities. For example, Taiwanese Telecommunications Act makes provision not only for the aims and instruments of regulation but also for the organizational structure of the regulator after telecommunications privatization in Taiwan. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。