【作者】 刘杰；

【导师】 田立；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 国际法学， 2023， 硕士

【摘要】 美国《反海外腐败法》自1977年颁布,历经两次修订,确立了属地管辖原则和属人管辖原则,将管辖范围扩展至域外。《反海外腐败法》反贿赂条款的属地管辖权扩展到行贿行为部分或全部在美国境内的发行人及国内实体以外的行为人。美国执法机构可以对发行人和国内实体的海外贿赂行为进行属人管辖的规制。同时,美国通过对反贿赂条款中的“外国公职人员”和“贿赂”等概念的扩张解释,进一步拓展了《反海外腐败法》管辖权的范围。美国不仅在立法层面上扩张管辖权范围,还利用执法机构近期确立的执法趋势实现了执法层面上管辖权范围的扩张。《反海外腐败法》执法力度的增强导致企业因为被美国调查而面临巨额罚款的制裁。中国企业由于在美上市,将受到《反海外腐败法》管辖原则的规制。随着美国执法机构加大对中国企业和高管的调查力度,中国企业在国际社会面临的风险增多。当前我国在治理跨国商业贿赂犯罪上存在诸多不足,主要表现在刑事立法的不完善和刑事司法规制的粗疏。跨国公司在华的商业贿赂行为常由外国执法机构率先进行披露调查。对于中国企业的域外行贿犯罪,也存在司法管辖缺位的现象。通过对比中美两国跨国商业贿赂犯罪的管辖现状,参考《反海外腐败法》的制度设计,能够为我国治理跨国商业贿赂犯罪提供借鉴。面对《反海外腐败法》域外管辖的扩张,有必要从国家和企业两方面提出应对之策,维护好我国的合法权益。在推动中国法域外适用体系建设的背景下,我国需要在《反海外腐败法》先进立法和执法经验的指导下,推进我国反腐败立法的域外适用,完善跨国商业贿赂立法和刑事管辖权体系,扩张管辖权范围。在司法实践中,需要对发生在我国境内和涉及我国企业的跨国商业贿赂案件积极行使管辖权,加强国际协调与合作,强化对跨国商业贿赂犯罪的规制。更多还原

【Abstract】 The U.S.Foreign Corrupt Practices Act(FCPA)has been enacted since 1977 and has been amended twice to establish the principles of territorial jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction,extending jurisdiction extraterritorially.The territorial jurisdiction of the FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions extends to actors other than issuers and domestic entities whose bribes are paid in part or in whole in the United States.U.S.law enforcement agencies may exercise jurisdiction over extraterritorial bribery by issuers and domestic entities based on personal jurisdiction principles.Meanwhile,the U.S.has further expanded the jurisdiction scope of the FCPA through an expansive interpretation of the concepts of "foreign public official" and"bribery" in the anti-bribery provisions.Not only has the U.S.expanded its legislative jurisdiction,but enforcement agencies have also expanded their enforcement jurisdiction by establishing new enforcement trends.The increased enforcement of the FCPA has resulted in companies facing large fines as a sanction for being investigated in the United States.Chinese companies will be subject to the jurisdictional principles of the FCPA due to their listing in the United States.As U.S.enforcement agencies increase their investigations of Chinese companies and executives,Chinese companies face increased risk in the international community.There are currently many deficiencies in China’s governance of transnational commercial bribery crimes,mainly in the imperfection of criminal legislation and the sloppiness of the criminal justice system.Commercial bribery by multinational corporations in China is often the first to be investigated by foreign law enforcement agencies for disclosure.There is also a lack of jurisdiction over extraterritorial bribery offenses by Chinese companies.By comparing the jurisdictional status of transnational commercial bribery crimes in China and the United States and referring to the institutional design of the FCPA,we can provide lessons for China’s governance of transnational commercial bribery crimes.In the face of the expansion of the extra-territorial jurisdiction of the FCPA,it is necessary to propose countermeasures from both the state and enterprises to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of China.In the context of promoting the construction of the extraterritorial application system of Chinese law,China can promote the extraterritorial application of China’s anti-corruption legislation,improve the transnational commercial bribery legislation and criminal jurisdiction system,and expand the scope of jurisdiction under the guidance of the legislative and law enforcement experience of the Anti-Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.In judicial practice,it is necessary to actively exercise jurisdiction over transnational commercial bribery cases occurring in China and involving China’s enterprises,strengthen international coordination and cooperation,and enhance the governance of transnational commercial bribery crimes.更多还原