预算审查法律机制研究

【作者】 陈欣；

【导师】 单飞跃；

【作者基本信息】 上海财经大学 ， 经济法学， 2021， 硕士

【摘要】 财政是国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的基础和重要支柱,预算作为财政问题的核心近年来备受关注,权力机关预算审查监督更是预算改革的重中之重。我国《预算法》所规定和建立的预算审查法律制度,为预算审查功能的实现提供了制度上的保障。然而纵观预算实践,权力机关的预算审查仍然面临着纸质草案过多、专业水平不足、审查形式主义等困境,审查监督效果不尽如人意。正确认识预算审查行为,提升权力机关预算审查能力,完善预算审查法律机制,实现权力机关对行政机关财政收支行为的实质监督和制约已成为当务之急。预算审查不仅是权力机关牵制行政机关的有力手段,还在预算行为体系中占据核心位置,具有独立的价值和意义。为确保预算审查的顺利进行,现有预算法律规范对预算审查的相关流程、内容等予以明确,形成了较为一套较为完备的预算审查法律机制。该机制共有两个环节:预算初步审查和大会会议审查,在不同的环节中审查主体、审查对象、审查标准、审查结果等都有不同。通过这些法律要素之间的相互影响、相互作用,为权力机关预算审查行为的行使以及审查目标的实现提供了制度上的支撑。我国预算审查法律机制虽然已经形成,但在实践运行中却面临形式化的困境。具体表现为:预算审查过程存在形式主义,包括预算审查主体存在错位、预算审查结果同质化倾向严重;现行预算法律体系实质性规范缺乏,包括预算法定责任主体和责任形式单一、全口径预算审查原则无法有效落实;由于我国计划经济时代“行政主导”观念的残留,人大代表缺乏对预算审查的正确认识,同时过于重视预算的程序性控制功能,而忽视了预算的政治性特质,使得那些本该属于权力机关的权力被忽略和搁置。预算审查法律机制的实质内涵是实质性和程序性相结合的审查机制构造。预算审查作为预算行为体系的核心,不仅是权力机关和行政机关预算权力的交汇点,也是不同主体所持预算意图实现沟通和交流的重要环节,重视预算意图在预算审查过程中的表达是应有之义。而在这一基础上形成的预算审查法律机制也应以预算意图为核心。通过分析可知,国家机关的预算权力都来源于公民预算权利,保障公民预算权利是各预算主体预算意图的落脚点与核心。在给付行政背景下,行政机关权力范围不断扩充,引入公民这一预算主体能够更为有效地实现对权力的制约。除上述实体性功能外,预算审查法律机制还具有程序保障功能,但目前我国预算改革过于重视预算审查法律机制的程序保障功能,忽视了预算意图在其中的表达,导致预算审查面临形式主义困境。完善预算审查法律机制,确保各方预算主体预算意图得以有效表达,实现充分交流和碰撞,是我国目前预算管理体系改革的当务之急。从权力制约和权利制衡两个方面入手完善预算审查的法律机制。预算作为权力机关控制行政机关的重要方式,域外已经形成了较为成熟的预算审查模式。我国由于实行一级政府一级预算的预算级次,地方层面基于自身情况进行了较多的创新实践。可以借鉴域外以及我国地方预算审查法律机制经验,从权力制约与权利制衡两方面入手完善我国预算审查法律机制。以权力制约权力,即加强人大预算审查能力,包括实行整体表决和单项表决相结合的表决制度、落实全口径预算审查原则、构建多元化的预算法定责任体系。而以权利制约权力不仅是对预算审查根本目的的回归,也为公民预算意图直接进入审查环节提供机会,从而实现公民与国家的共同治理。更多还原

【Abstract】 Public finance is the foundation and an important pillar of the modernization of the national governance system and governance capabilities.The budget,as the core of the fiscal issue,has attracted much attention in recent years.The budget review power of congress is the top priority of budget reform.The budget review legal system stipulated and established in Chinese "Budget Law" provides an institutional guarantee for the realization of the supervisory function of congress.However,looking at budget practice,the budget review of congress is still facing dilemmas such as too many paper drafts,insufficient professionalism,and review formalism,and the results of review and supervision are not satisfactory.A correct understanding of budget review behavior,improving the budget review capabilities of congress,and perfecting the legal mechanism for budget review have become a top priority.Budget review is not only a powerful means for power organs to contain administrative organs,but also occupies a core position in the budget behavior system.Therefore,it can be considered that budget review has independent value and significance.In order to ensure the smooth progress of budget review,the existing budget laws and regulations make clear the relevant process and content of budget review,forming a relatively complete legal mechanism of budget review.The mechanism has two links: preliminary budget review and conference meeting review.In different links,review subjects,review objects,review standards,review results,etc.are different.Through the interaction between these legal elements,it provides institutional support for the exercise of the budget review of the congress and the realization of the review goal.Although China’s budget review legal mechanism has been formed,it faces a dilemma in practice.The specific manifestations are: formalism in the budget review process,including the misalignment of the budget review subject,and the serious tendency to homogeneity of the budget review results;The current budget legal system lacks substantive norms,including the single subject to the responsibility and the single form of responsibility,and the principle of full-caliber budget review cannot be effectively implemented;Due to the residual concept of "administrative leading" in the era of planned economy in China,deputies to the National People’s Congress lack a correct understanding of budget review.And the deputies of the National People’s Congress pay too much attention to the procedural control function of the budget,but ignore the political characteristics of the budget,which makes the power that should belong to the authority ignored and shelved.The substantive connotation of the budget review legal mechanism is the structure of the review mechanism that combines substantive and procedural aspects.As the core of the budget behavior system,budget review is not only the intersection of the budgetary powers of the authority and the government,but also an important link in the communication and exchange of budget intentions held by different entities.It is necessary to pay attention to the expression of budget intentions in the budget review process.The budget review legal mechanism formed on this basis should also focus on budget intentions.Through analysis,it can be seen that the budget power of state agencies comes from citizens’ budget rights,and the protection of citizens’ budget rights is the core of the budgetary intentions of various budget entities.In our current welfare administrative and intervention administrative coexisted social background,the scope of power of the government is constantly expanding,and the introduction of citizens as the main body of the budget can more effectively realize the restriction of power of the government.In addition to the substantive functions,the budget review legal mechanism also has a procedural guarantee function.However,the current budget reform in our country pays too much attention to the procedural guarantee function of the budget review legal mechanism and ignores the expression of budget intentions in it,which leads to a formalistic dilemma in budget review.Improving the legal mechanism for budget review,ensuring that the budget intentions of all parties to the budget can be effectively expressed,and achieving full exchanges and collisions are the top priorities for our country’s current budget management system reform.From the two aspects of power restriction and right balance,we will improve the legal mechanism of budget review.Since the budget is an important way for the authority to control the government,a relatively mature budget review model has been formed outside the region.There are five levels of government in China,and each level of government has its own budget.So the local governments have carried out more innovative practices based on its own conditions.We can learn from the experience of foreign countries and our local governments to improve the legal mechanism of budget review from the two aspects of power restriction and right balance.Restricting power with power means strengthening the budget review capabilities of the National People’s Congress,including the implementation of a voting system that combines overall voting and single voting,implementing the principle of full-caliber budget review,and building a diversified legal responsibility system for budgets.Restricting power with rights is not only a return to the fundamental purpose of budget review,but also provides opportunities for citizens’ budget intentions to directly enter the review process,thereby realizing the common governance of citizens and the country.更多还原