香港特区廉政公署为何监督私营机构人员?  

Why Does the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s ICAC Supervise Private Sector Personnel?

作　　者：孙展望 韩嘉敏 Sun Zhanwang;Han Jiamin

机构地区：[1]南京审计大学纪检监察学院

出　　处：《廉政学研究》2024年第1期175-190,236,237,共18页Clean-Governance Study

摘　　要：香港特区廉政公署的监督对象除了公职人员,还包括私营机构人员。其制度逻辑是:私营机构腐败与公权力腐败有深刻关联,且对市场公平和有序造成重大威胁,应当纳入反腐范围。廉政公署在打击公职人员腐败的同时一并打击私营机构人员腐败,具备组织成本优势。尤其是在有效遏制香港公权力系统的集团式腐败后,廉政公署有足够精力与资源投入对私营机构的反腐。而廉政公署对私领域可能的不当干预,也因相应的法治设计而被有效抑制。最终,廉政公署监督私营机构人员这一制度获得香港社会认可。这一经验表明,专职反腐机构的监督范围不必局限于公职人员,但需要相应的社会条件与制度设计。The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s Independent Commission Against Corruption(ICAC)supervises both public officials and private sector personnel.The underlying logic is that private sector corruption,being deeply intertwined with public sector corruption,significantly threatens market fairness and order,thus meriting inclusion in anti-corruption efforts.ICAC has an organizational cost advantage in cracking down on corruption among public officials while also combating corruption among private sector personnel.Especially after effectively curbing group style corruption in Hong Kong’s public power system,ICAC has sufficient energy and resources to invest in anti-corruption efforts against private institutions.The possible improper intervention of ICAC in the private sector is also effectively suppressed due to the corresponding rule of law design.In the end,ICAC’s system of supervising private sector personnel gained recognition from Hong Kong society.This experience indicates that the supervision scope of dedicated anti-corruption agencies does not need to be limited to public officials,but the supervision requires corresponding social conditions and institutional design.

关 键 词：廉政公署 私营机构人员 监察委员会 

分 类 号：D262.6[政治法律—政治学]