| 485 | 5 | 9 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
香港特区建立了以行政长官为核心的行政主导制,在这一体制下,行政机关与立法机关相互制约相互配合,且重在配合,司法机关独立审判。权力分置和行政主导是确定香港立法会调查权法律界限的基本维度。香港立法会在行使《中华人民共和国香港特别行政区基本法》(以下简称香港基本法)第73条授予的职权时,可以启动调查程序,传召证人作证并提供证据,但香港立法会调查权的行使必须符合目的性原则和"合理需要"原则,并受到行政特权和司法特权的限制。另外,香港立法会若以监督香港政府为目的传召政府官员作证并提供证据,其调查事项应仅限于第64条列举的范围,且须通过"安全"或"重大公共利益"标准的检验。这是香港行政主导制对立法会调查权的特别限制。
Abstract：The political structure of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is one which is composed of guiding administration units, independent judiciary, with control and balance of administration and legislation. The base and core of political structure are separation of power and executive-led, which definite critically the legal limits of investigation power of the Legislative Council. When exercising the powers and functions in accordance with the article 73, the Legislative Council can summon persons concerned to testify or give evidence, and in accordance with the article 48(11), article 64, article 73(10) and article 85 of The Basic Law of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, executive privilege and judiciary privilege are the limits of investigation power of Legislative Council, and Legislative Council should implement investigation in accordance with principle of aim-led and reasonably required. To make the Government to account to Legislative Council, Legislative Council can summon government officials concerned to testify or give evidence, but the power of Legislative Council is limited in the conditions of article 64 and the investigation should pass the "security and vital public interests" test.
(1)参见立法会网站“专责委员会”,http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr98-99/chine se/sc/sc01/general/sc01.htm。
(2)参见“专责委员会—今届及历届会议记录”,香港立法会(http://www.legco.gov.hk/general/chinese/timeline/committees_9900.htm),2017年6月2日访问。
(3)LegCo Power Case,HCAL 79/2009.
(4)香港大学法学院于2009年10月15日举办“The Constitutional Authority of the Legislative Council:The LegCo Powers Case”研讨会,中国人民大学宪政与行政法治研究中心于2009年12月13日主办了“郑家纯、梁志坚诉香港特别行政区立法会案”学术研讨会。
(5)如动议对曾荫权涉嫌严重渎职行为进行调查、对现任梁振英展开的调查。
(6)梁振英指控该专责委员会中一名议员梁继昌与之有讼争,难以公正开展调查。参见汤家骅:《没完没了的UGL》,《明报》2017年5月29日。
(7)香港基本法第73条第十项规定:“在行使上述各项职权时,如有需要,可传召有关人士出席作证和提供证据。”
(8)参见《“郑家纯、梁志坚诉香港特别行政区立法会案”学术研讨会综述》,中国宪政网(http://www.calaw.cn/article/default.asp?id=5783),2013年5月9日访问。
(9)许崇德:《略论香港特别行政区的政治制度》,《中国人民大学学报》1997年第6期。
(10)有学者指出:“基于权力制衡原则,立法会调查权不得侵犯其他部门的专属事务和司法独立精神”。参见朱孔武:《香港立法会调查权的法理探析》,《政治与法律》2009年第8期。
(11)行政主导制被认为是认识香港立法调查权的一个维度。有学者认为:“以香港独特的行政主导制为基础,依据香港《基本法》的具体规定,香港立法会调查权的行使应该遵循授权性、辅助性、谦抑性、可审查性等原则,从而达到香港政制中行政权立法权与司法权的有机平衡。”王书成、顾敏康:《香港立法会调查权限分析》,《环球法律评论》2010年第6期。
(12)LegCo Power Case,HCAL 79/2009,para.145.
(13)Smith v.Interstate Commerce Comm.,245 U.S.33,46(1917)。
(14)James M.Landis,Constitutional Limitations of the Congressional Power of Investigation,40 Harv.L.Rev.153,200(1926).
(15)People v.Keeler,99 N.Y.463,487(1885).
(16)(78)有学者认为,“立法会个别调查行为的授权议案,有必要明确规定调查范围和目的。”参见朱孔武:《香港立法会调查权的法理探析》,《政治与法律》2009年第8期。
(17)LegCo Power Case,HCAL 79/2009,para.146.
(18)George W.Van Cleve&Charles W.Tiefer,Navigating the Shoals of"Use"Immunity and Secret International Enterprises in Major Congressional Investigations:Lessons of the Iran-Contra Affair,55 Mo.L.Rev.43,49(1990).
(19)See McGrain v.Daugherty,273 U.S.135,(1927);Watkins v.United States,354 U.S.178(1957);United States v.Rumely,345 U.S.41(1953);Anderson v.Dunn,19 U.S.204,(1821).
(20)See Howard R.Sklamberg,Investigation Versus Prosecution:the Constitutional Limits on Congress's Power to Immunize Witnesses,78 N.C.L.Rev.153,215(1999-2000).
(21)LegCo Power Case,HCAL 79/2009,para.203.
(22)Ibid,at para.209.
(23)Ibid,at para.2.
(24)Ibid,at para.24~25.
(25)Ibid,at para.166,193,194.
(26)Ibid,at para.89-143.
(27)Ibid,at para.210.
(28)《立法会(权力及特权)条例》第9条。
(29)See Watkins v.United States,354 U.S.178(1957),at 201-04.
(30)See Wilkinson v.United States,365 U.S.399,408(1961).
(31)See Deutch v.United States,367 U.S.456,470(1961);Sacher v.United States,356 U.S.576,577(1958);States v.Rumely,345 U.S.41(1953),at 47-48.
(32)J.Richard Broughton,Paying Ambition's Debt:Can the Separation of Powers Tame the Impetuous Vortex of Congressional Investigations?21 Whittier L. Rev.797,814(2000).
(33)United States v.Nixon,418 U.S.683,708(1974).
(34)See Kalah Auchincloss,Congressional Investigations and the Role of Privilege,43 AM.CRIM.L.REV.165,167(2006).
(35)See J.Richard Broughton,Paying Ambition’s Debt:Can the Separation of Powers Tame the Impetuous Vortex of Congressional Investigations?21 Whittier L.Rev.797,815-817(2000).
(36)See Kalah Auchincloss,Congressional Investigations and the Role of Privilege,43 AM.CRIM.L.REV.165,188(2006).
(37)这一用语源自众议院非美活动调查委员会(House Un-American Activities Committee)以麦卡锡命名的听证会。See J.Richard Broughton,Paying Ambition's Debt:Can the Separation of Powers Tame the Impetuous Vortex of Congressional Investigations?21 Whittier L.Rev.797,817(2000).
(37)See Kalah Auchincloss,Congressional Investigations and the Role of Privilege,43 AM.CRIM.L.REV.165,186(2006).
(39)行政豁免是指为避免在任总统因陷入诉讼而背上沉重的负担,以致无法正常履行总统职责,在任总统在卸任之前免于法院审判。Clinton v.Jones,520 U.S.681,704-706(1997).
(40)See United States v.Nixon,418 U.S.683,705-706(1974).
(41)Ibid,at 706-707.
(42)Ibid,.at 710,713.
(43)United States v.Reynolds,345 U.S.1,11(1953).
(44)The 1992-93 Staff of the Legislative Research Bureau,An Overview of Congressional Investigation of the Executive:Procedures,Devices,and Limitations of Congressional Investigative Power,1 Syracuse J.Legis.&Pol’y1,16(1995).
(45)Raoul Berger,Executive Privilege:A Constitutional Myth,Cambridge:Harvard University Press.1974.P1.
(46)江心学:《行政特权:美国总统的护身符》,《解放军外语学院学报》1993年第3期。
(47)LegCo Power Case,HCAL 79/2009,para.180.
(48)See Todd D.Peterson,Prosecution Executive Branch Officials For Contempt of Congress,66 N.Y.U.L.Rev.563,614-615(1991).
(49)(50)(51)(52)港立法会:《调查政府与医院管理局对严重急性呼吸系统综合症爆发的处理手法专责委员会报告》。香港立法会网站(http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr03-04/chine se/sc/sc_sars/reports/chl.pdf),第13页、附录Ⅳ,第321页,2017年6月3日访问。
(53)See United States v.Reynolds,345 U.S.1(1953);United States v.Nixon,418 U.S.683,705-706(1974);United States v.American Telegraph&Telephone,567 F.2d121,128(D.C.Cir.1977).
(54)Anderson v.Dunn,19 U.S.204,226(1821).
(55)See J.Richard Broughton,Paying Ambition’s Debt:Can the Separation of Powers Tame the Impetuous Vortex of Congressional Investigations?21 Whittier L.Rev.797,821(2000).
(56)美国联邦最高法院在McGrain v.Daugherty一案中指出,没有掌握充分的信息,国会不可能明智、有效地立法。McGrain v.Daugherty,273 U.S.135,175(1927).
(57)美国法院在司法审查中建立了利益平衡检验法则。S.Select Comm.on Presidential Campaign Activities v.Nixon,498 F.2d 725,730,732(D.C.Cir.1974).
(58)Todd D.Peterson,Congressional Investigations of Federal Judges,90 Iowa L.Rev.1,65(2004).
(59)See Ibid,at 37-40.
(60)Ibid,at 39.
(61)Ibid,at 40.
(62)See Ibid,at 30-38.
(63)See Ibid,at 13-19,25-28.
(64)Ibid,at 65.
(65)Ibid,at 66.
(66)See Harvey Rishikof&Barbara A.Perry,Separateness but Interdependence,Autonomy but Reciprocity:A First Look at Federal Judges'Appearances Before Legislative Committees,46 Mercer L.Rev.667,674-678(1995).
(67)因香港“占中”中有殴打行为七位警察被判入监,引发警察及其家属及部分香港人士的强烈反弹,更出现指控审判该案外籍法官身份及其公正性的言论。参见沈家乐:《重判七警让港人痛心支持上维持公义》,刘斯路:《从“七警案”思考香港审判权被垄断的现象》,《文汇报》2 017年2月22日A13版。
(68)Todd D.Peterson,Congressional Investigations of Federal Judges,90 Iowa L.Rev.1,49(2004).
(69)肖蔚云:《略论实施澳门特别行政区基本法的主要经验》,载《依法治澳与特区发展》,澳门特别行政区法务局、澳门基本法推广协会2004年版,第18页。
(10)程洁:《香港宪制发展与行政主导体制》,《法学》2009年第1期。
(71)议会具有国民代表的性质。参见[日]美浓部达吉著:《代议制度论》,邹敬芳译,中国政法大学出版社2005年版,第64-80页。
(72)See V Hailsham,Parliamentary Inquiry and Congressional Investigation Compared,40 A.B.A.J.787(1954).
(73)The 1992-93 Staff of the Legislative Research Bureau,supra note 40,at 1.
(74)Watkins v.United States,354 U.S.178(1957).
(75)S ee James M.Landis,Constitutional Limitations of the Congressional Power of Investigation,40 Harv.L.Rev.153,213(1926).
(76)Ernest J.Eberling,Congressional Investigations:A Study of the Origin and Development of the Power of Congress to Investigate and Punish for Contempt,Octagon Books(New York),229,282-83(1973).
(77)1999年3月10日,吴霭仪议员动议的“对律政司司长投不信任票”辩论,是立法会议员首次针对政府官员的不信任动议。针对政府官员的不信任议案属于无法律效力的议案,并无免除政府官员职位的法律效力。但这类议案亦会产生政治影响,如房屋委员会主席王葛鸣和财政司司长梁锦松便被迫辞职。
基本信息:
DOI：10.14167/j.zjss.2020.10.008
中图分类号:D921.9
引用信息:
[1]叶海波.香港立法会调查权的法律界限——政治制度的视角[J].浙江社会科学,2020,No.290(10):67-75+158.DOI:10.14167/j.zjss.2020.10.008.
基金信息:
国家社科基金项目《香港“客卿”司法的实证研究》;; 深圳大学高水平大学学科建设（二期）项目“跨境经营中的合规管理”（项目号0000011301）的阶段性研究成果
2020-10-13
2020-10-13