請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/61160
標題: | 日本之立法技術—以設置外部董事為例 Japan's Legislative Techniques:A Study on The Revision of Outside Directors |
作者: | Jia-Ying Hsieh 謝佳縈 |
指導教授: | 黃銘傑(Ming-Jye Huang) |
關鍵字: | 會社法,外部董事,監察人,雙軌制,法社會學,法政策學,立法模型,立法程序,立法技術,安倍經濟學,審議會, Japan's Companies Act,Outside Directors,Supervisor,Two-Tier Boards Company,Sociology Of Law,Legal Policy,Legislative Model,Legislative Process,Legislative Techniques,Abe-Mix,Council, |
出版年 : | 2020 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 本文以日本2014年和2019年兩次之會社法之修正,說明日本如何在雙軌制公司組織中引進單軌制公司機關外部董事。包含兩大研究路線,一為日本引進外部董事之政經背景與立法過程,二為因上述影響而形成之日本會社法制之實定法內容,以此從程序面之法政策和實體面之條文技術一併說明日本會社法制作為比較法之參考價值所在。 本文考察了日本近年公司法制修正之政經脈絡,說明外部董事之法制修正表面上看似是政府與產業雙方之間之對抗,實際上是日本傳統經營文化與西方資本市場間的衝突。而安倍政權在引進外資的政策目標下,透過精細的「政府—專家會議—法律」之國家治理技術模型,一步步的將政策轉化成法律,透過這樣的模型操作,產業與政府之間之對立關係被轉換成專家審議會中專家之間之對立關係,並達到了政治責任發散之效果。其中,日本之公司法修正一方面看似是經濟掛帥,另一方面卻是以穩固的法律人作為基盤。在此之中,審議會中之法律專家為達成政策目的,使用了各式各樣的立法技術,包含:遵循或解釋原則(comply or explain)、保留修正條款、綜合性立法之運用等等。 本文除介紹日本會社法層次分明的機關分權設計方法外,另外從會社法中外部董事之組織功能來看,日本將外部董事定位為將董事會之功能從管理型調整為監督型之調節紐,對於如何從雙軌制公司如何轉換到單軌制公司具有重要參考價值。 而為說明我國與日本之公司法制差異,本文以我國獨立董事之引進過程以及2018年公司法之修正歷程為例,試圖說明我國法制之問題不在於法條如何解釋,而是整體立法模式具有系統性之缺陷。以公司法制而言,我國之立法模式並非日本式的「政府—專家會議—法律」模型,在缺乏政策形成過程以及政策與法律之間轉換程序之情形下,我國之立法為「政府—法律」的一階段模式,缺乏細緻的立法作業,立法技術不佳導致公司法制之條文及效果混亂,不利法律遵循以及吸引外資。 我國天生領土狹小,即使政府看似有主動追尋資本之動機,但政策到法律的落實過程中,仍不透明而缺乏專業人員之參與,然而公司法及上市公司之治理法制,作為我國投入資本市場運作之最基本架構,法規修正及回應之需求尤為迫切。公司法本質為複數人參與資本市場之契約,具有高度法律專業性,並非純粹之經濟性事務。我國於政策制定及法規修正上,行政部門應該強化草案制定過程之溝通及協商,特別對於外界包含產業界及專家建議,採納或是回應過程予以之法制化,而法律人則也應主動嵌入產業或政府中,創造自身之功能與價值。 This paper uses the revision of Japan's Companies Act in 2014 and in 2019 as examples to illustrate how Japan introduces outside directors into their Two-Tier Boards companies.This article contains two research approaches. The first one is to introduce Japan's political and economic background, and the legislative process of Japan's Companies Act. The other one is to introduce the positive law of Japan's Companies Act, which is stronly effected by the above-mentioned effects. In this way, the real reference value of Japan's Companies Act as a comparative law could be more complete and more specific. This article examines the political and economic context of the revision of Japan's outside directors in recent years, and it shows the conflicts between the government and industry, or to be more specifically, the conflicts between traditional Japanese management culture and Western capital markets rules. Under the policy objective of introducing foreign capital into Japan, the Abe government transformed its policies into laws through a sophisticated legislative model , which in this paper is described as ' The Government – Expert Council – Law Model'. Through this model, the antagonistic relationship between industry and government is transformed into the antagonistic relationship between experts in the Council, and therefore the divergence of government’s political responsibility is achieved. Among this, the legal experts in the Council used a variety of legislative techniques to achieve policy purposes, including: “ Comply or Explain clause”, “Saving Clause”, ”Packaging Legislation” ,and etc. The organizational function of outside directors in the Japan's Companies Act is an adjustment button to adjust the function of the board from management to supervision. It has important reference value for how to switch from Two-Tier Boards company to One-Tier Boards company. In order to explain the difference between the corporate legal system of Taiwan and Japan, this article takes the introduction the legislative history of independent directors in Taiwan and the revision of Taiwan ‘s Company Act in 2018 as examples. The absence of a policy formation process and the lack of the conversion system between the policy and the law, so resulting the lacks of meticulous legislative operations in Taiwan ‘s legislation model as a “ The Government – Law Model”. And gave weak attractive towards foreign investment. Taiwan has a small territory. Although the government actively pursues capital, the policy to the implementation of the law is untransparent and lacks the participation of professionals. The essence of company law is the contract for multiple people to participate in the capital market. It has a high degree of legal professionalism and is not a purely economic matter. Taiwan‘s administrative department of company law should strengthen the communication and consultation in the law- drafting process, especially for the adoption or response process for the suggestion form industry and experts. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/61160 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202001218 |
全文授權: | 有償授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-3006202017182800.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 3.11 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。