失信连带惩戒的立法比较与理论探析——以各省市信用条例为基础  

Legislative Comparison and Doctrinal Analysis of Joint and Several Disciplinary Actions for Breach of Trust:Based on Credit Regulations in Various Provinces and Cities

作　　者：张丽琴[1] Zhang Liqin

机构地区：[1]武汉理工大学法学与人文社会学院,湖北武汉430063

出　　处：《南海法学》2023年第5期23-30,共8页The South China Sea Law Journal

摘　　要：企业实施严重违法失信行为时,信用责任的承担主体通常不限于其自身,还包括企业内相关人员,这是失信惩戒具有的双罚制属性。各地信用条例在连带主体范围、公示时是否标注个人、企业失信信息是否记入个人信息及如何承担连带责任等问题上的规定各有不同,学界对此类连带惩戒手段的实施大都持谨慎态度,对执法现状常有质疑。基于信用责任的补强性质,连带惩戒对象、信息标注与录入等应严格依照裁判文书规定,有关部门还应完善惩戒措施适用规则、确立免责事由,构建省际执法协调机制。When enterprises commit serious illegal and discredit behavior,the liability subjects of credit responsibility are usually not limited to themselves,but also include related personnel,which makes the credit liability present the attribute of double punishment system.Credit regulations vary in the scope of joint and several subjects,whether individuals are marked in the public notice,whether information on corporate default is recorded in personal information and how to assume joint and several liability,while academics are generally cautious about such joint and several disciplinary actions and often question the current state of law enforcement.Based on the complementary nature of credit responsibility,joint and several disciplinary objects,information labeling and entry should be strictly in accordance with the provisions of the judgment,and should also improve the rules of application of disciplinary measures,establish a number of exemptions,and establish inter-provincial law enforcement coordination mechanism.

关 键 词：企业违法失信 连带惩戒 社会信用条例 

分 类 号：D922.1[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]