摘要
公权处置前置和集体行动困境不是阻碍我国证券民事赔偿责任实现的主因。实践案例显示,公权处置前置带来的“罚先赔后”“赔偿不足”是导致投资者消极行权的重要因素。对此,可以发掘公法的激励机制,促进、保障受害投资者民事利益优先实现。证券行政执法和解的和解金优先赔偿投资者、嗣后盈余上缴国库,能够保障投资者损失优先受偿。我国目前适用该制度的案件数量偏少,立法对和解金的性质和地位界定不清。对此,应在公私法融合的背景下建立对和解金的独立认识,在和解金谈判中尽可能实现对受害投资者的足额补偿。将被害人利益置于核心地位的恢复性司法也具有保障受害投资者民事利益实现的效能。刑事责任减让能够激励犯罪人在个人财产之外筹措资金,缓解可供执行财产不足的问题。刑事责任的减让须与犯罪人的赔偿能力关联起来,同时考察市场秩序法益的恢复程度,保持惩罚、预防功能的总量守恒。
The issue of inadequate protection of investors'rights has received widespread attention in China.Although the procedures for prior processing by public authorities and the collective action dilemma of victimized investors may limit the range of cases in which an investor can initiate a civil lawsuit,and increase the inertia for investors somehow,they are not the main reasons for the“low desire”of investors to initiate civil lawsuits.Taking the“Yin Guang Xia Case”as an example,most of the investors went through a lengthy litigation process and were ultimately successful,only to find that the infringers had no property to compensate.The“Xian Yan Case”became the first case in China to realize the priority principle of civil liability in securities tort cases,as it preserved the fines of criminal proceedings.The strong contrast between the two cases shows that the negative expectation of the investors that they would“win the case but lose the money”in the lawsuit is the main reason for their negative exercise of the right to litigate.And hidden behind the phenomenon is the public authority's“competition with the people for profit”of fines and confiscation of illegal gains in the proceedings when it deals with the case.The distribution of settlement money from settlement of securities fraud charges,which is“first used to compensate investors for their losses,with surpluses paid to the State Treasury”,as represented by the United States,can facilitate and safeguard the prior realization of civil liability in securities tort cases at the administrative enforcement stage.Jurisdictions such as Germany and Hong Kong make a strict distinction between administrative fines,settlements and civil compensation,with settlements going directly to the state treasury and not being used to compensate victimized investors for their losses.Settlement in securities fraud charges began in China in 2015,but it has been applied in only three cases in nearly a decade.There is some ambiguity in the attributes and status of settlement money in China's law,which may negatively affect its legitimacy and regulatory effect.Settlement fund combines the attributes of public and private law and some of the characteristics of administrative fines and civil compensation,and its unique distribution can promote the priority realization of civil liability,and securities law enforcement agencies should achieve as much as possible in the negotiation of settlement funds to fully compensate victimized investors.Restorative criminal justice,which places the interests of the victim at its center,emerged in Western countries at the same time as in China.China formally established a criminal reconciliation system for restorative justice when the Criminal Procedure Law was amended in 2012,but securities offences are currently excluded from the scope of application.The concession of criminal liability in restorative justice undoubtedly has a strong incentive for offenders to fulfill their civil liability,and can also incentivize them to supplement their ability to compensate victimized investors by borrowing,seeking help from friends and family,etc.,in addition to their personal property.The concession of criminal liability must adhere to certain limits.Specifically,the concession of criminal liability needs to be linked to the ability of the offender to make compensation,while at the same time examining the degree of restoration of the legal interests of the securities market order,so as to maintain the total amount of the punitive and preventive functions of securities legal liability.
出处
《四川大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2024年第1期187-197,218,219,共13页
Journal of Sichuan University：Philosophy and Social Science Edition
基金
贵州大学人文社会科学一般项目“数字经济时代金融数据的法律保护研究”(GDYB2023017)
国家社会科学基金重大项目“数字经济的刑事安全风险防范体系建构研究”(21&ZD210)。
关键词
证券民事赔偿
行政和解
恢复性司法
公法激励
Civil compensation of securities fraud charges
Settlement
Restorative justice
Public law incentives
作者简介
刘博涵,贵州大学法学院副教授(贵阳550025)。
