【作者】 周欣；

【导师】 徐向华；

【作者基本信息】 上海交通大学 ， 宪法学与行政法学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 立法程序理应成为检验和判断法案的多重过滤装置,通过法案的优胜劣汰实现理性决策,从而优化立法结果,彰显程序的民主与效率价值。通过对我国中央与31个省级地方立法程序中的法定过滤机制进行梳理,对1979年以来全国人大常委会和上海市人大常委会立法中法案过滤实践进行实证分析发现,我国立法程序的过滤功能相当有限。就程序制度而言,短缺疏漏的法定过滤机制难以充分保障过滤功能的发挥;就实效发挥而言,立法程序的过滤功能尚未真正体现:在提出立法议案阶段,与代表法案全被过滤相比,国家机关法案的过滤实属偶然,一些“先天不足”的法案得以列入议程;在审议阶段,法定的过滤机制似乎形同虚设,实践中的过滤不仅非常有限,而且对象较为单一,法案“获得新生”势为必然;在表决阶段,表决的实际作用重在对立法草案的消极认可,而非淘汰。立法程序过滤功能的缺失,与立法者追求法案无异议通过、受立法潜规则影响而行为失范以及立法强计划性导致的程序虚置等因素有关。因此,应当从矫正立法观念、规范主体行为、完善程序制度以及用足法定机制等四个方面强化我国立法程序的过滤功能。更多还原

【Abstract】 In order to produce reasonable and acceptable law, the legislative process needs to function as a filter to eliminate the defective bills. The filtering capability is indispensable for the legislative process to achieve the value of democracy and efficiency.By studying the legislative procedure of China both on national and provincial level as well as exploring the legislative practice of NPCSC and of the standing committee of Shanghai municipal people’s congress in the last 30 years, it is revealed that the legislative process of China has highly limited filtering capacity. Different from the fact that all bills of law submitted by the delegates are filtered, most bills submitted by the executive branch can be placed on the agenda easily and finally become law with unanimous votes after a quick and smooth deliberation, only with few exceptions. IT is rare and unusual to see bills of law killed in the deliberation and voting process of legislation in China.The missing of the filtering capability is related to several factors, such as debates are not welcomed in the legislative process, the special committees are influenced by the underlying rules; the legislative procedure is flawed and so on.更多还原