论我国证监会的司法救济请求权  

CSRC's Claim Right of Judicatory Remedy

作　　者：张德峰[1] 

机构地区：[1]湖南师范大学法学院,湖南长沙410081

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2011年第5期102-109,共8页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：湖南师范大学青年学术骨干计划:"经济法的道德解读"(09GG16);湖南省教育厅科学研究一般项目:"宏观调控执行中地方政府的法律责任研究"(09C669)

摘　　要：在证券执法过程中,为了制止、预防证券违法行为,补救证券违法后果和保护投资者利益,应当赋予证券执法主体享有请求司法机关(法院)通过司法程序对证券违法行为予以裁判的权利。我国《证券法》意图通过赋予证监会准司法权替代司法救济请求权,但是,证监会准司法权的确立依据及其本身都存在问题,准司法权也无法作为司法救济请求权的替代。我国证监会司法救济请求权的确立和行使离不开相应的立法。从实体上看,司法救济请求权立法主要在于确立并明确证监会司法救济请求权的行使范围;从程序上看,司法救济请求权立法主要在于如何从诉讼程序上保障权利的行使。In order to stop and prevent securities transgress,remedy the securities transgress result and protect investors＇ interests in the enforcement process,the securities enforcement body should be granted the claim right of judicatory remedy to claim court judge securities transgress.The Securities Law of PRC grants CSRC quasi-jurisdiction instead of the claim right of judicatory remedy.However,the reasons of granting quasi-jurisdiction are deficient,and it can not substitute the claim right of judicatory remedy as well.The granting and exertion of the claim right of judicatory remedy need relevant legislation.The substantial legislation of the claim right of judicatory remedy includes granting and defining the enforcement bound of the claim right of judicatory remedy,and procedural legislation includes ensuring the enforcement of concerning rights.

关 键 词：中国证券监督管理委员会 司法救济 请求权 准司法权 

分 类 号：D926[政治法律—法学]