法学专业 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制.docx

法学专业 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制.docx

《法学专业 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《法学专业 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制.docx（10页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

法学专业外文翻译外文文献英文文献从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制

LegalRegulationofAdministrativeMonopolyAsViewedfromChineseAntimonopolyLaw

LingWang

LawschoolofShandongUniversityofTechnology

Zibo255049,Shandong,China

Abstract

Theadministrativemonopolybreakstheprincipleofjustice,andhaslargeharmtothesociety.ThespecialchapterinChineseAntimonopolyLawregulatesthecontentsandcorrespondinglegalresponsibilitiesofadministrativemonopoly,butthelawstillhassomedeficiencies.TheChineseAntimonopolyLawshouldbeperfectedfromincreasingtheoperationproperty,confirmingthecomprehensivelegalresponsibilities,confirmingthelawenforcementagencyofanti-administrativemonopoly,expandingtherangeoflegalregulationandestablishingthejudicialreviewsystem.

Keywords:

ChineseAntimonopolyLaw,Administrativemonopoly,Regulation

Inchina,theadministrativemonopolymainlymeansthebehaviorsthatadministrativesubjectsharmthemarketcompetitionanddestroysocialismmarketeconomyorderbytheadministrativepower.Theadministrativemonopolyinitiallybelongstoeconomicmonopoly,anditsharmismorethaneconomicmonopoly,anditdestroystheprincipleofjustice,andinducestheoccurrenceofunfaircompetitionandmonopolyinspecialmarket,anditharmsthebenefitsofmostmarketsubjects,andlargelywasteseffectiveresources,andblockstheestablishmentandperfectionofthesocialismmarketcompetitionmechanism.Therefore,itshouldseeksolutionandregulationmethodsfromvariousapproachesfortheadministrativemonopoly.Onlyinthisway,theobstacleofChineseeconomicsystemreformandthedevelopmentofmarketeconomycanberemoved,whichcanpromotethequickdevelopmentofeconomy,enhancethelivinglevelofpeople,improvethetotalsurvivalenvironment,andrealizetheharmonyandstabilityofthesociety.

1.RegulationofadministrativemonopolyinChineseAntimonopolyLaw

Fortheregulationofadministrativemonopoly,therearemanyresearchesanddiscussionsamongChinesescholars,andthesystemreformviewandthelegalregulationviewarerepresentativeviews.Thesystemreformviewthinksthattheadministrativemonopolyistheproductofsystem,anditcanbecompletelysolvedbydeepeningtheeconomicsystemreformandthepoliticalsystemreform,andthelegalmeasureishardtosolvetheproblemofadministrativemonopoly.Thecentralcontentofthelegalregulationviewisthattheadministrativemonopolyisveryharmful,anditmustbeforbiddenmainlybythelaws.Thelegalregulationviewisalsocanbedividedintotwofactions,andoneistomainlyusetheadministrativelawtoregulatetheadministrativemonopoly,andtheotherthinksthatChineseAntimonopolyLawisthemainpowertoregulatetheadministrativemonopoly.

BecauseChineseeconomicandpoliticalsystemreformisagradualprocesswhichneedsquitelong-termendeavors,andthistransferneedslargepatientandwillpower,sotheadministrativemonopolyhasbeenaveryhotpotatoatpresent,andithasseriouslyblockedtheeconomicdevelopmentofChinawithlargesocialharms,anditevenblockstheeconomicandpoliticalsystemreformswhichisbeinginChina,soitmustbeforbiddenassoonaspossible,orelse,thelargedestroyingfunctiononthedevelopmentofChineseeconomywillbehardtoimage.Therefore,itistooidealtoonlydependonthesystemreformtoregulatetheadministrativemonopoly,andtheeffectisnotobvious.Inthepresentnationalsituation,lawisthefeasiblemeasuretoregulatetheadministrativemonopoly.Becausetheadministrativemonopolyrootsineconomicmonopolyandhasmanycharactersandharmsofeconomicmonopoly,moreandmorelegalscholarswanttoutilizeChineseAntimonopolyLawtoregulatetheadministrativemonopoly.“ItisthecharacteristicofChineseAntimonopolyLawtotaketheadministrativemonopolyasthecontrolobjectofantimonopoly,anditseemsanecessaryselectionaccordingtothenationalsituation,becausetheadministrativemonopolyformingintraditionalplannedeconomysystemisimpossibletoberemovedbyadministrativemeasure,anditcanonlybesolvedbythelegalmeasure,i.e.theAntimonopolyLaw（Zhang,1993,P.357）”.

AtAugust1of2008,ChineseAntimonopolyLawbecameeffectiveinpeople’sexpectations,andthefifthchapterspeciallyregulatesthecontentofadministrativemonopoly,andthearticlesfrom32to37respectivelygeneralizetheeliminationofadministrativepowerabuseandthebehaviorsofcompetitionlimitation,andcompletelyregulatetheconcreterepresentformofadministrativemonopoly,andarticle51regulatescorrespondinglegalresponsibilities.Thus，theregulationofadministrativemonopolyisfirstregulatedinlaw,andthelegalapproachisthemainmeasuretogoverntheadministrativemonopoly,whichindicatedthatthelegalregulationviewhadbeenadoptedfinally.ThecontentsofadministrativemonopolyintheAntimonopolyLawembodiestheadvancementofChineselegaltheorystudyandlegislationtechnology,anditshowedthedecisionofChineselegislatorstostandardizetheenforcementofadministrativepowerandstoptheabuseofadministrativepower.Ofcourse,lawisonlyonemostimportantmeasuretoregulatetheadministrativemonopoly,andthereasonableandeffectivereformsinpolityandeconomyalsohaveveryimportantmeaningsfortheregulationofadministrativemonopolybehaviors.

2.DeficienciesofadministrativemonopolyregulationinChineseAntimonopolyLaw

RelativeregulationsaboutadministrativemonopolyinChineseAntimonopolyLawareactiveandhelpfulexplorationtoregulateadministrativemonopolybehaviorsbylaw,andcorrespondinglegalregulationsaredeeplymeaningfulandinfluencingtoeliminatethebadinfluencesofadministrativemonopoly,promotethefaircompetition,establishnormalmarketorder,andguaranteetheordereddevelopmentofmarketeconomy.However,whetherrelativecorrespondingsystemsorthearticlesinthechapter5stillhavesomedeficiencies,andtheanti-administrativemonopolymuchstillremainstobedone.

2.1Regulationsaretoofundamentaltooperate

Thearticlesinthechapter5ofChineseAntimonopolyLawaresomeprincipledarticleslackinginoperation,whichmakethejudiciaryandlawenforcementagenciesaredifficulttodistinguish.Andmanyabstractconceptssuchaswhatextentcanachieveadministrativemonopoly,andwhatisthattheabuseofadministrativepowertoblockthefreecirculationofcommoditiescannotbedefinedclearlyinonlyfivelegalarticles,sothecatchwordsofanti-administrativemonopolyappearincapable.AtAugust1of2008,thefirstdaywhenChineseAntimonopolyLawwasimplemented,ChineseStateAdministrationofQualitySupervision,InspectionandQuarantineencounteredthefirstcaseaboutChineseAntimonopolyLaw.However,intheexpectationoftenthousandsofpeople,thiscasecametoanuntimelyend,andthoughthecourtadoptedthearticlethatthelimitationofactionswasovertoevadethiscase,butitcanbesupposedthatifthecourtcannotevadeitbyrelativereasons,whatistheresult?

WasthebehaviorthatChineseStateAdministrationofQualitySupervisionforcedtopushtheelectricsupervisioncodebusinessofCiticGuoanInformationTechnologyCo.,Ltdwithitsownsharesin69kindsofproductanadministrativemonopolybehavior?

Theresultmightreachthesamegoalbydifferentroutes.Andrelativeregulationsaboutthecurrentantimonopolylawendowlaw-officerstoomuchdiscretiontomakethemto“goafterprofitsandavoiddisadvantages”.

2.2Theregulationsaboutthelegalresponsibilityofadministrativemonopolyaredeficient

ChineseAntimonopolyLawregulatesthecivil,administrativeandcriminalresponsibilitiesassumedbymanagerswhoimplementmonopolybehaviorsindetail,butforthelegalresponsibilityofthebehaviorsofadministrativemonopoly,onlythearticle51ofChineseAntimonopolyLawregulatesthat“Ifadministrativepowerbygovernmentandorganizationstowhichlawsandregulationsgrantrightstoadministerpublicissuesabuseadministrativepower,toeliminateorrestrictcompetition,shallbeorderedbysuperiorauthoritiestocorrectthemselves;peopleindirectchargeandpeopledirectlyinvolvedshallbeimposedadministrativepunishment.Theantimonopolyexecutionauthoritiesshallsupplysuggestiontorelatedsuperiorauthoritiestohandleaccordingtolaw.”Manyadministrativeresponsibilitiessuchas“shallbeorderedbysuperiorauthoritiestocorrectthemselves;peopleindirectchargeandpeopledirectlyinvolvedshallbeimposedadministrativepunishment”formdifferentlegalresultsofdifferentsubjectstoimplementmonopolybehaviors,sopeoplebegintosuspectthejusticeoflaws,whichvirtuallyhelpstheadministrativesubjectstoimplementadministrativemonopoly,andthedeterrentforcewillbereducedlargely.Atthesametime,thoughtheresponsibilityofChineseAntimonopolyLawistoolighterandbecomesamereformality,andthelawisnotobeyedandstrictlyenforced,sotheadministrativemonopolyremainsincessantafterrepeatedprohibition.

2.3Thejurisdictionofantimonopolylawenforcementinstitutionislimited

Thedefinitionabouttheanti-administrativemonopolylawenforcementagencyinthefiftyfirstarticleofChineseAntimonopolyLawisstillblurry,andontheonehand,thesupervisionproceduresshouldbeindependentlyestablishedtorestrainlawsbythislaw,andontheotherhand,thelawregulatesthattheadministrativemonopolyshouldbedominatedbysuperiorauthorities,andthearticlethat“Ifadministrativepowerbygovernmentandorganizationstowhichlawsandregulationsgrantrightstoadministerpublicissuesabuseadministrativepower,toeliminateor