|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 China的资本主义道路的法律保障问题 |
 |
dck
加入时间: 2004/04/02
文章: 2801
经验值: 4649
|
|
|
作者：dck 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
China的资本主义道路的法律保障问题
（洪宽：）世界上的资本主义国家很多，成功的很少，绝大多数问题很多，经济失败。
南美经济学家德索托仔细研究资本主义成功的奥秘，发现，凡是经济上成功的资本主义国家，都有完善的法制作后盾，财产的转让、交易÷信托
非常方便、高效、低成本，这样使得大多数人可以参与资本投资和创业，企业家得到回报，社会给人以公平的感觉。
举例说，您在北京拥有一所房产，在纽约也拥有一所同样的房产，在纽约的房子可以抵押给银行，房主拿着现金去投资其他项目，北京现在大
概也可以这么作，但手续繁琐，成本高。
最近，著名的未来学家托佛勒出版了一本新书《财富的革命暴涨》(Revolutionary Wealth)，探讨了西方社会自工业革命以来财富增长的现象
，试图找出其规律。其中一个主要观点和德索托一致，不过，托佛勒根据美国的经济显现，作了进一步的延伸。他说，未来财富的创造，更多
的要靠无形的东西，例子是google的上市。这当然依靠一套成熟的司法制度的保障。
很难想象中国司法的落后，怎样保证大多数人公平合理地创造财富，而不造成社会动荡。
美国《新闻周刊》的记者报导，提笔就写中国已经“富”了，对此，咱们绝大多数中国人是不同意的。中国仍是穷的。
贫“法”的富裕
China Above the Law
A poorly functioning legal system is supposed to hurt economic growth. But nobody told the Chinese.
跛足和贫乏的司法制度将难以支持中国经济的继续高速增长，没有人告诉中国人这一点？中国政府理解这一点吗？最新一期《新闻周刊》刊登
的记者萨拉﹒沙佛尔的报导，提出了这类问题。
2 月2日，中国共产党的一份期刊发表了中共中央政治局常委、中国的最高治安官员罗干的一篇文章，惊动了中国的尚显稚嫩的司法界和外国投
资者们。罗干的这篇文章宣称，共产党必须保持其对全国司法系统的主导权，要警惕企图使中国法制西方化的“敌对势力”。而仅在一个星期前
，北京才刚刚宣布，中国的经济将以目前令人眼花缭乱的步伐，持续增长。要知道，中国去年的增长率已经达到了10.7％。
如果把这两条头条新闻同时摆在一起，不由得突显出了这样一个对比强烈而又实在令人费解的矛盾：很奇怪，中国怎么能够在没有一套独立的
和现代化的法制系统下，实现如此高速的经济增长?这样的增长还能持续多久呢?
学会玩“法外”游戏规则 沙佛尔在报导中提出了这样的问题，并试图解答，中国社会何以在不健全的、“无法”或“法律之外”（Lawless）的环境
中，实现了市场秩序、经济增长和生活富裕的问题，祕诀在哪里呢？
报导指出，长期以来，西方经济学家和法学家都在讨论的一个问题就是：健全的法制和公正的法庭审判制度，是一个成熟的市场经济建立和运
转的先决条件。
这些学者们认为，衹有通过有效、透明和可预见的司法体制，企业和消费者才能确信：投资将得到必要的保护，合同执行和纠纷将能公平地解
决。而健全的法治，通过保护知识产权鼓励了创新，并确保发明家和厂商的权利和让他们努力得到了回报。如果没有这些法制提供的保护，可
以断定，证券交易所、商品市场和其他复杂的资本主义经济的标志性系统都不可能真正发挥作用。
确实，如今世界上许多法制不健全的发展中国家都陷在了腐败、浪费和低效的浊泥中而步履蹣跚。
但中国似乎不是这样，尽管，中国的法院系统还是雏形，尽管，共产党仍牢牢控制着它，但是中国经济却呈现一派欣欣向荣的景象。北京在
1970年代末起进行了自由市场改革后，出现了私营经济的蓬勃发展，亿萬人民摆脱了贫困，海外投资蜂拥而入。
这里的祕诀就在于：在中国，企业家们已经找到了各种充满创意的解决办法，绕开中国靠不住的法院系统来解决他们之间的问题。这些措施包
括，寻求由同情他们的党政官员来调解双方的商务纠纷，通过威胁供货方说，要转到别处找货源的方式，来让对方妥协从而解决合同的纠纷﹔
还有，通过支持他们的党政领导官员的协助，来加强安全意识和获得好的解决方案，从而实现对企业的商业机密的保护。
然而，一个健全的法制系统仍然是必不可少的。如果没有这样一个系统，其他的各种替代机制就会冒出来，取代法制应当发挥的功能而司其职
。例如，那些大型的外国和中国企业，已经学会了利用中国的高度竞争的商业环境来解决或避免合同纠纷：如果碰到供应商无法按时交货时，
他们就干脆威胁说，要转向其他的供应商去要货了。
所以，中国的商场确实是有游戏规则的，而且这些规则大多是有利于商家的，衹是这些规则及其作用机制的运行，完全不同于西方国家。
例如，为了反腐败，中央政府最近制定了新的规定，要求地方政府要更快地发放营业执照，目的是减少官员索贿的时间和机会。研究中国的咨
询公司 Dragonomics驻北京的董事总经理阿瑟﹒克罗伯(Arthur Kroeber)说，“人们总是低估了（在中国）透过行政权力，而不是法律结构来影
响变化的力量。”
中国特色的产权保护措施
腐败是广泛存在的，但是它对经济的损害并不像估计的那么大，因为中共已经开始根据他们所在管辖权範围内的经济发展来评定官员的政绩。
虽然许多官员还在给增长率注水，但是已经有其他的许多官员在设法吸引更多的企业到他们的管辖区和帮助这些企业的发展。已经在中国担任
高层主管有二十年的理查德﹒托门（Richard Thoman）说，这使得官员们“有了政治上的动力”去解决经济纠纷，“当地市长能够为你把事情摆平
。在这个意义上，它就像一种仲裁程序一样起作用。”
如今在中国，已经产生出类似于对等组（ad hoc）和局域一样的方式来保护知识产权。外国厂商经常抱怨中国在保护知识产权方面的记录欠佳
，盗版DVD光碟和冒仿的名贵手袋提包随处可见，但是这并没有阻止中国和一些外国公司的不断创新。
香港中文大学客座教授道格拉斯﹒弗勒（Douglas Fuller）指出，在大陆的台湾计算机芯片设计公司已在这方面取得了成功，他们在自己的工
厂内和正在设计中的产品中采取了严密的保安措施，使得他人无法使用反求工程（ReverseEngineer）来冒仿他们的产品和技术。 这一战略来
自于一个美籍华人刘英武（英文名：Leonard Liu），他在美国硅谷创立了群硕(Augmentum)软件开发公司，同时在中美两地设有公司办公室。
他运用了在过去管理两家台湾公司所吸取到的教训，在位于中国的公司办公室里采取了比美国的公司办公室严格得多的保护措施。为了防止有
人盗取公司机密，在他的中国公司里，所有的办公室电脑一律没有任何可移动外接硬盘和消去USB接口。也没有对外的电子邮件系统，任何员工
如果未经允许擅自上，马上就被解雇。
刘英武说：“我们不能让人带走任何东西，哪怕是一小段程序中的字节。美国式知识产权保护对创新是非常有益的，但是我不认为那是必需的（
做法）。”显然，在刘英武看来，在中国这种“法外”环境中，企业对知识产权的自我保护意识和措施才是更实用的做法。
当然，中国的经济是不是能够在这种“简易汇集方式”的环境中，在未来以目前的速度继续增长下去，谁也不能担保。不少专家预期，除非出现
一个独立的司法制度，否则中国的经济势必受阻。这些专家认为，随着中国社会商业更加复杂化，制定出明确的规则和程序，将势在必行。目
前这种基于非正式规则和人际关系的大杂烩似的工商环境（workarounds）将变得越来越不适用。这当中最坚决主张这种改变的，就是中国新兴
的、青睐西方式改革的法律专业人士。
北京依然担心司法独立的威胁
在文化大革命期间，中国曾“砸烂公检法”，取消了全国所有的法律行业，在毛泽东逝世后，才逐渐采纳了西方化激励手段的改革，重建了司法
机构。随后，呈现出改革新气象后的中国司法系统开始发挥作用。如今中国公民上法庭的人数，达到了史无前例的程度，据统计，2006年全国
法庭立案达到800萬例。人们确实聽到，中国领导人现在宣称，依法治国是他们的指导原则之一。
但是在现实中，法制的改革依然远远落后于中国的经济发展。例如，虽然教育程度提高了，但是许多法官、律师和检察官受到的训练还是少得
可怜﹔案件的结果依然经常由贿赂和政府上层来决定。共产党没有放弃对司法机构的控制，几乎所有法官都是党员，必须服从党的命令。北京
依然在担心，一个独立的司法系统可能削弱中共对权力的垄断地位。
这最明显地体现在，虽然有了行政诉讼法律，但是一旦老百姓要告政府官员和部门，依然非常困难。《纽约时报》的一篇报导说，中国司法制
度下的判决，经常让许多无权无势的普通人感到不公平。但是，一个更大的问题是法院经常拒绝受理，或者索性否认那些棘手的法律纠纷真的
存在。
“立案”这个词在英语里可以被简单翻译为“记录或登记一个案件”，但是在中文里，它要受到很多官方干预，使得在许多想要进行行政诉讼的人
看来，法律体系衹对经济案件开放。
自从四分之一个世纪前，共产党第一次创造了一个貌似现代的法律体系，刑事案件（政府起诉个人）大多数通过法庭来完成。自然人和法人也
经常通过法庭解决民事纠纷。但是学者们说，法律体系的最敏感的一个用途－－1989年《行政诉讼法》赋予公民的起诉政府的权力，依然像空
中楼阁。
推动司法改革要靠老百姓
推动中国司法改革的，将是越来越多的普通老百姓，他们曾经对共产党的“依法治国”的教条宣传信以为真，现在都开始对法庭有了越来越多的
需求。纽约州立大学法学院研究中国法律和提倡西方化改革的专家杰罗米﹒科恩（Jerome Cohen）说：“中国书店里摆满了有关怎样利用司法系
统的好书籍。中国人真正在努力使得这个系统能像其他国家的司法制度一样运转。”
但其他的学者认为，中国可能会在不发生重大司法改革的情况下不断持续增长。他们指出，中国政府在维持社会秩序方面已经证明有娴熟而神
奇的技巧，在保持社会稳定的同时，又鼓励他其他有助于经济增长的趋势。北京大学法学院潘炜教授说：“中国的经济增长已经越来越依靠廉价
劳动力和稳定的政治环境。而（稳定的）政治所起的决定作用非常重要。”
此外，不管是法律环境如何，庞大的中国经济有可能持续吸引国内和外国的投资者。在北京开业的律师马克﹒塔金斯基（Michael Dardzinski
）说：“中国是一个特例，因为还有很多人非常看好中国市场和她的潜力。法治衹是人们权衡长期赚钱的许多问题中的一个问题。法学者和其他
学者可能会继续讨论和争辩中国的司法改革的必要性和如何改革的问题。与此同时，其他人则衹是干脆在利用一切可能的方式在经营他们的生
意。”
China: Rich and Lawless
A poorly functioning legal system is supposed to hurt economic growth. But nobody told the Chinese.
By Sarah Schafer
Newsweek International
Feb. 19, 2007 issue - On Feb. 2, a Communist Party journal published a speech by Luo Gan, a Politburo member and China's top
law-and-order official, that startled the country's burgeoning legal profession and foreign investors. Luo declared that the
Communist Party should maintain its dominance over the nation's courts and resist "enemy forces" that were trying to
Westernize its legal system. Just a week earlier, Beijing had announced that the country's economy was continuing to grow at
a dazzling pace, hitting 10.7 percent last year. The two headlines pointed to an increasingly conspicuous paradox that is
puzzling observers: how is China's economy managing to grow so quickly without an independent and modern legal system? And
how long can it continue?
Western economists and legal scholars have long argued that a robust legal system and impartial courts are prerequisites for
a mature market economy. Effective, transparent and predictable judicial institutions are deemed necessary to assure
businesses and customers that investments will be protected, contracts enforced and disputes resolved equitably. The rule of
law encourages innovation by establishing intellectual-property rights and ensuring that inventors—and the firms that back
them—are rewarded for their efforts. Without these protections, it is assumed, stock exchanges, commodities markets and other
hallmarks of a complex capitalist economy cannot function properly.
Many developing countries with weak judicial systems have been hobbled by corruption, waste and inefficiency. But China seems
to be thriving despite its own rudimentary court system, which remains firmly under Communist Party control. Since Beijing
introduced free-market reforms in the late 1970s, a booming private sector has emerged, hundreds of millions of people have
escaped poverty and overseas investment has flooded in. The secret: entrepreneurs have found a variety of creative solutions
to get around China's unreliable courts. These include seeking mediation for business disputes from sympathetic party
officials, enforcing contracts by threatening to go elsewhere, and protecting trade secrets with heightened security—
solutions aided by the pro-business slant of China's leadership.
Beijing all but abolished the legal profession during the Cultural Revolution. After Mao Zedong's death, it slowly began to
rebuild the judiciary, adopting Western-inspired reforms. Today China's courts do function after a fashion, and its citizens
are turning to them in record numbers—about 8 million cases were filed last year. Indeed, China's leaders now tout the rule
of law as one of their guiding principles.
But in reality, legal reform has lagged far behind changes in China's economy. Though education levels are rising, for
example, many judges, lawyers and prosecutors remain poorly trained. Cases are still often decided by bribes and political
connections. And the party shows no sign of ceding its control—almost all judges are party members and required to obey its
orders. Beijing still fears that an independent judiciary could undermine the party's monopoly on power.
In place of a proper legal system, however, other mechanisms have emerged to play its role. Large foreign and domestic firms,
for example, have learned to resolve or avoid contract disputes by exploiting the country's hypercompetitive business
environment. If a supplier fails to deliver on time, they simply threaten to give their business to someone else. And China
does have rules, which are largely pro-business, though they are enforced differently than in the West. For example, the
government recently imposed a new regulation requiring local officials to grant business licenses faster, leaving bureaucrats
less time to demand bribes. "People from legal societies always underestimate the power to affect change through
administrative, rather than legal structures," said Arthur Kroeber, managing director of the economic research firm
Dragonomics in Beijing.
Corruption is widespread, but it has not hurt the economy as much as expected because the party has begun evaluating its
officials based on economic development in their jurisdictions. Though many bureaucrats exaggerate local growth rates, many
others strive to attract businesses to their areas and help them grow. "There is political motivation" to resolve disputes,
says Richard Thoman, who spent two decades doing business in China as a top executive. "The local mayor can smooth things out
for you. In a sense, it's almost like an arbitration process."
Similarly ad hoc solutions have developed for protecting property rights. Foreign businesses often complain about China's
poor record in this area; pirated DVDs and knock-off luxury handbags are still easy to find. But this hasn't stopped Chinese
and some foreign companies from innovating. Douglas Fuller, a visiting professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong,
points out that Taiwanese computer-chip design firms have succeeded on the mainland by adopting tight security measures at
their factories and designing products that are difficult to reverse-engineer.
A spin on that strategy comes from Leonard Liu, founder of the U.S. software company Augmentum. Applying lessons he learned
while managing two Taiwanese companies, he has protected Augmentum by requiring much stricter protections at its Chinese
offices than exist at its U.S. facilities. Augmentum's computers in China have no removable disks and their USB ports are
disabled. There is no externale-mail system, and any employee who attempts to connect to the Internet without permission is
fired. "We make sure you cannot take anything away that is in bits and bytes," Liu says. "American style [intellectual-
property] protection is very helpful for innovation, but I will not say it's necessary."
Of course, there's no guarantee that China's economy can continue to grow at its current pace with such jury-rigged
solutions, and many experts expect it to falter unless an independent legal system emerges. These experts argue that the need
for clear rules and procedures will grow as Chinese society and commerce become more complex, and the current workarounds—
based on a hodgepodge of informal rules and personal relationships—will become less useful. Among those making this argument
most forcefully are members of China's own burgeoning legal profession who favor Western-style reforms.
Giving impetus to their cause are increasing numbers of ordinary Chinese citizens, who have taken the Communist Party's
rhetoric about the rule of law at face value and are starting to demand more from the country's courts. "Chinese bookstores
are filled with quite good books about how the legal system can be used," says Jerome Cohen, an expert on Chinese law and a
proponent of Western reforms who teaches at the NYU School of Law. "You're finding people who are really trying to make the
system work like it does in other countries," he says.
But other pundits argue that China may well keep on defying expectations by continuing to grow without major legal reform.
They point out that the government has proven deft at maintaining social order and encouraging other trends that could keep
the economy humming. "Economic growth here depends [more] on cheap labor and a stable political environment, [and less on]
the improvement of the legal system," says Pan Wei, a professor at Beijing University's law school. "And political
determination is also very important."
Moreover, the sheer size of China's economy is likely to continue luring local and foreign investors, regardless of the legal
environment. "China's a special case because there is still great faith in the Chinese market and its potential," says
Michael Dardzinski, a Beijing-based corporate lawyer. "The rule of law is just one issue among many others that is weighed
against the long-term potential to make money." Lawyers and academics may continue to argue about whether reform is necessary
and how to make it happen. In the meantime, others are simply taking care of business—any way they can.
© 2007 Newsweek, Inc.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17081610/site/newsweek/page/2/
作者：dck 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
