热门站点| 世界资料网 | 专利资料网 | 世界资料网论坛
收藏本站| 设为首页| 首页

青海省信访条例

作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-07-22 01:09:49  浏览:9406   来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载

青海省信访条例

青海省人大常委会


青海省信访条例
青海省人大常委会


(1996年9月26日青海省第八届人民代表大会常务委员会第二十六次会议通过 1996年9月26日公布 1997年1月1日起施行)

目 录

第一章 总 则
第二章 信访人
第三章 机构与职责
第四章 受 理
第五章 办 理
第六章 奖励与处罚
第七章 附 则

第一章 总 则
第一条 为了保障公民、法人和其他组织的合法权益,密切国家机关同人民群众的联系,维护信访秩序,根据宪法、有关法律和行政法规的规定,结合我省实际,制定本条例。
第二条 信访是人民依法参与管理国家和社会事务的一种途径,是信访人向国家机关反映情况,提出意见、建议、要求和申诉,对国家机关及其工作人员实施监督并由有关机关处理的活动。
信访人是指进行信访活动的公民、法人和其他组织。
国家机关是指本省行政区域内的国家权力机关、行政机关、审判机关和检察机关。
第三条 信访工作遵循下列原则:
(一)依照法律、法规和政策秉公办理;
(二)实事求是,重证据,重调查研究;
(三)分级负责,归口办理;
(四)处理实际问题与思想疏导相结合;
(五)谁主管,谁负责,及时办理,把问题解决在当地或基层。
第四条 信访活动必须遵守法律、法规和政策,不得损害国家、集体和其他公民的合法权益。
依法进行的信访活动受法律保护。任何单位和个人不得扣压人民群众的来信、来访材料;不得压制、打击报复、迫害信访人。
第五条 各级国家机关及其工作人员,应当认真处理人民群众的来信来访。各级国家机关的负责人,应当阅批重要来信,接待重要来访,研究解决信访工作中的问题,检查指导信访工作。
第六条 各民族人民群众都有使用本民族语言文字进行信访活动的权利。

第二章 信访人
第七条 信访人享有下列权利:
(一)对国家机关和工作人员提出意见、批评和建议;
(二)对国家机关和工作人员的违法失职行为提出控告或检举;
(三)在自身合法权益受到侵害时,提出申诉、控告;
(四)依照规定程序,催促处理,要求答复和复查信访事项。
第八条 信访人应当履行下列义务:
(一)遵守宪法、法律、法规;
(二)实事求是地反映情况;
(三)服从符合法律、法规、政策的处理决定和答复;
(四)尊重社会公德、遵守信访秩序,爱护接待场所的公私财物,不得影响国家机关工作秩序和公共秩序,不得侮辱、殴打、威胁信访工作人员。
第九条 信访人反映问题,应当先向责任归属机关或者单位提出。对处理决定不服时,可持处理决定向上一级主管机关和单位反映。
书面反映问题,应当签署真实姓名,写明通讯地址和邮政编码。申诉、控告、检举信应当写明被反映人的基本情况和基本事实。
第十条 公民、法人或其他组织发现可能造成重大社会影响或突发事件的信访信息,应当及时就近向地方国家机关报告。
第十一条 信访人以走访形式进行信访活动,应当到有关国家机关设立或指定的接待场所。

第三章 机构与职责
第十二条 全省各级国家机关及其所属部门和派出机构,应当按照方便群众,有利工作的原则,设置或者确定信访工作机构,或者配备专职,兼职信访工作人员。
各级国家机关的信访机构代表本机关受理和办理信访事项。有关机关应当配合信访工作机构的工作。
信访工作的业务经费应当保证。
第十三条 各级信访机构的职责是:
(一)受理来信,接待来访,向信访人宣传法律、法规、政策;
(二)向有关机关或部门、单位转办、交办信访事项,承办上级机关交办的信访事项;
(三)督促、检查和参与协调、处理有关信访事项;
(四)协助国家机关负责人检查、指导本地区、本系统的信访工作;
(五)进行调查研究,分析掌握信访动态,及时向本机关负责人反映情况,提出建议,报告重要信访事项。
第十四条 信访工作人员应当努力提高政治素质和业务素质,忠于职守,遵纪守法,坚持原则,秉公办事。
信访工作人员在信访工作中有参加有关会议和阅读有关文件,进行调查,提出建议,应急处置的权利。
信访工作人员与信访事项或者信访人有利害关系或因其他原因可能影响信访事项公正处理的,应申请回避。
第十五条 国家机关及其工作人员不得将检举、揭发、控告材料及有关情况,透露或者转送给被检举、揭发、控告的人员和单位。

第四章 受 理
第十六条 本省各级国家机关按职权范围受理下列信访事项:
(一)对国家机关通过的决定、决议,制定和批准的地方性法规、条例和规章的建议和意见;
(二)对本行政区域内的政治、经济和社会发展等方面的重大事项的建议和意见;
(三)对国家机关及其工作人员的建议、批评和意见;
(四)对国家机关及其工作人员违法违纪行为的控告和检举;
(五)对国家机关查处案件的申诉;
(六)上级国家机关交办或其他国家机关转办的信访事项;
(七)有关人民群众切身利益方面的要求;
(八)其他信访事项。
第十七条 涉及两个或两个以上国家机关的信访事项,首先由具体信访事项的主要责任归属机关受理;主要责任归属机关受理有困难的,应与所涉及的其他国家机关协商受理;协商受理有争议的,由共同的上级机关协调决定受理机关。
第十八条 受理机关对不属本机关职权范围的信访事项,应当在受理信访之日起5日内向有权处理该信访事项的机关移送,并告知信访人直接向该机关提出。
第十九条 应当受理信访事项的国家机关合并或撤销的,由继续行使其职权的国家机关或上一级国家机关受理。
第二十条 依照法律、法规规定应当通过调解、仲裁、行政复议或者诉讼解决的事项,受理机关应当告知信访人向调解组织、仲裁机构、行政复议机关和司法机关提出。
第二十一条 地方国家机关对于可能造成社会影响的紧急信访事项,应当依法采取措施,并向上级机关汇报,同时向有关机关通报。
第二十二条 对越过责任归属机关的信访,受理机关或单位认为反映的问题属于重大特殊信访事项的,可以直接受理;属于一般信访事项的,应当告诉信访人按本条例第九条办理。
第二十三条 精神病人有实际问题需要解决的,由其监护人、亲属或者所在单位代为反映。精神病人到来访接待场所纠缠的,其监护人、所在单位或者地区应当负责接回,必要时,受理机关可以请求所在地的公安机关将其带离接待场所。

第五章 办 理
第二十四条 国家机关依照职权和信访事项性质,按下列方式办理信访事项:
(一)对本机关依法应当做出处理决定的信访事项,应当直接办理;
(二)对依法应当由上级国家机关做出处理决定的信访事项,应当及时报送上级国家机关;
(三)对依法应当由其他国家机关或下级国家机关或组织作出处理决定的信访事项,应当及时转送办理;
(四)对转交下级国家机关或组织办理的重要信访事项,应当建立督促检查制度。
第二十五条 审判机关、检察机关受理的诉讼信访事项,依照有关法律规定办理。
第二十六条 涉及国家机关负责人的信访事项,应当按照干部管理权限和有关规定移送有关机关办理。
第二十七条 跨地区、跨部门的信访事项,由办理机关会同有关地区、部门协商办理;遇有争议时,报上级机关协调;对重大疑难信访事项,上级机关可以组织有关部门研究办理。
第二十八条 国家机关直接办理的信访事项应自受理之日起30日内办理完毕,并视情况答复信访人;情况复杂,办理期限可以适当延长。
第二十九条 国家机关或组织对上级机关交办的重要信访事项应自受理之日起90日内办理完结,并将办理结果报告交办机关,视情况答复信访人。不能按期办理完结的,应当向交办机关说明情况。
交办机关认为下级机关或者组织对交办的信访事项处理不当的,应当要求重新处理。
第三十条 信访人和有关单位对国家机关作出的信访事项处理决定不服的,可以请求复查。原办理机关应自收到复查请求之日起30日内提出复查意见,并予以答复。
上级国家机关受理信访人和有关机关的复查请求,应根据情况分别作出处理:
(一)处理正确的不再处理;
(二)处理决定或复查意见有错误的,可责成下级国家机关重新处理。
第三十一条 国家机关应当按照有关规定对信访材料、有关记录、文件等立卷归档,妥善保管。

第六章 奖励与处罚
第三十二条 有下列情形之一的,由有关国家机关和单位给予表彰和奖励:
(一)信访人提出的建议、意见,对国民经济和社会发展及改进国家机关工作有贡献的;
(二)信访人检举、揭发各类违法行为,对推动廉政建设,保护社会公共利益,维护社会稳定有贡献的;
(三)单位或者个人在信访工作中做出优异成绩或有突出贡献的。
第三十三条 信访人有下列行为之一,情节轻微的,应予以批评教育或者处分;违反治安管理的,由公安部门依照《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚条例》予以处罚;构成犯罪的,依法追究刑事责任:
(一)歪曲或者捏造事实,诬告和陷害他人的;
(二)影响国家机关工作秩序,损害接待场所的公私财物,威胁、侮辱、殴打工作人员的;
(三)拦截公务车辆,围堵、冲击国家机关,妨碍公共秩序,影响正常公务活动进行的,或者占据公共场所,聚众闹事的;
(四)携带危险品、爆炸品以及管制器械进入接待场所的;
(五)诱使、胁迫他人信访,或者制造谣言、煽动群众集体上访的;
(六)有其他违法、犯罪行为的。
第三十四条 国家机关工作人员在信访工作中有下列行为之一的,视其情节由有关机关给予行政处分;构成犯罪的,依法追究刑事责任:
(一)不履行职责,玩忽职守或顶着不办,给工作造成损失的;
(二)因拖延或者推诿贻误时机,造成不良后果的;
(三)隐匿、丢失或者擅自销毁信访人的信访材料的;
(四)泄露信访工作秘密的;
(五)威胁、压制、打击报复或者侮辱、殴打信访人的;
(六)滥用职权、徇私舞弊、索贿受贿的;
(七)应当回避而不回避的;
(八)其他违反本条例行为的。

第七章 附 则
第三十五条 本省区域内各社会团体、企事业单位的信访工作参照本条例执行。
第三十六条 本条例自1997年1月1日起施行。



1996年9月26日
下载地址: 点击此处下载

CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES ORDINANCE ——附加英文版

Hong Kong


CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES ORDINANCE
 (CHAPTER 71)
 CONTENTS
  
  ion
  I    PRELIMINARY
  hort title
  nterpretation and application
  he "reasonableness" test
  Dealing as consumer"
  arieties of exemption clause
  ower to amend Schedules 1 and 2
  II    CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES
  dance of liability for negligence, breach of contract, etc.
  egligence liability
  iability arising in contract
  nreasonable indemnity clauses Liability arising from sale or
supply of
  s
  "Guarantee" of consumer goods
  Seller's liability
  Miscellaneous contracts under which goods pass Other provisions
about
  racts
  Effect of breach on "reasonableness" test
  Evasion by means of secondary contract
  Arbitration agreements
  III   CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE CONTROL DOES NOT APPLY
  International supply contracts
  Choice of law clauses
  Saving for other relevant legislation
  Application
  IV    CONSEQUENTIAL AND OTHER AMENDMENTS
  (Omitted)
  dule 1. Scope of sections 7, 8, 9 and 12
  dule 2. "Guidelines" for application of reasonableness test
  dule 3. (Omitted)
 Whole document
  
  imit the extent to which civil liability for breach of contract, 
or
  negligence or other breach of duty, can be avoided by 
means of
  ract terms and otherwise; and to restrict the 
enforceability of
  tration agreements. [1 December 1990] L. N. 38 of 1990
 PART I PRELIMINARY
  
  hort title
  Ordinance may be cited as the Control of Exemption Clauses
Ordinance.
  nterpretation and application
  In this Ordinance--
  iness" includes a profession and the activities of a public 
body, a
  ic authority, or a board, commission, committee or 
other body
  inted by the Governor or Government;
  ds" has the same meaning as in the Sale of Goods Ordinance (Cap.
26);
  ligence" means the breach--
  of any obligation, arising from the express or implied terms 
of a
  ract, to take reasonable care or exercise reasonable skill 
in the
  ormance of the contract;
  of any common law duty to take reasonable care or exercise 
reasonable
  l (but not any stricter duty);
  of the common duty of care imposed by the Occupiers 
Liability
  nance (Cap. 314); "notice" includes an announcement, whether or
not in
  hing, and any other communication or pretended communication;
  sonal injury" includes any disease and any impairment of 
physical or
  al condition.
  In the case of both contract and tort, sections 7 to 12 apply 
(except
  e the contrary is stated in section 11 (4)) only to 
business
  ility, that is liability for breach of obligations or duties
arising--
  from things done or omitted to be done by a person in the course
of a
  ness (whether his own business or another's); or
  from the occupation of premises used for business purposes 
of the
  pier, and references to liability are to be read 
accordingly; but
  ility of an occupier of premises for breach of an obligation or 
duty
  rds a person obtaining access to the premises for 
recreational or
  ational purposes, being liability for loss or damage 
suffered by
  on of the dangerous state of the premises, is not a business
liability
  he occupier unless granting that person such access for the 
purposes
  erned falls within the business purposes of the occupier.
  In relation to any breach of duty or obligation, it is 
immaterial
  her the breach was inadvertent or intentional, or whether 
liability
  it arises directly or vicariously.
  1977 c. 50 ss. 1&14 U. K.]
  he "reasonableness" test
  In relation to a contract term, the requirement of reasonableness 
for
  purposes of this Ordinance and section 4 of the 
Misrepresentation
  nance (Cap. 284) is satisfied only if the court or 
arbitrator
  rmines that the term was a fair and reasonable one to be 
included
  ng regard to the circumstances which were, or ought reasonably
to have
  , known to or in the contemplation of the parties when the 
contract
  made.
  In determining for the purposes of section 11 or 12 whether a
contract
  satisfies the requirement of reasonableness, the court or 
arbitrator
  l have regard in particular to the matters specified in 
Schedule 2;
  this subsection does not prevent the court or arbitrator from
holding,
  ccordance with any rule of law, that a term which purports to 
exclude
  estrict any relevant liability is not a term of the contract.
  
  In relation to a notice (not being a notice having 
contractual
  ct), the requirement of reasonableness under this 
Ordinance is
  sfied only if the court or arbitrator determines that it would
be fair
  reasonable to allow reliance on it, having regard to 
all the
  umstances obtaining when the liability arose or (but for the 
notice)
  d have arisen.
  In determining (under this Ordinance or the 
Misrepresentation
  nance (Cap. 284)) whether a contract term or notice 
satisfies the
  irement of reasonableness, the court or arbitrator shall have 
regard
  articular (but without prejudice to subsection (2) to whether
(and, if
  to what extent) the language in which the term or notice is 
expressed
  language understood by the person as against whom another 
person
  s to rely upon the term or notice.
  Where by reference to a contract term or notice a person 
seeks to
  rict liability to a specified sum of money, and the question
arises
  er this Ordinance or the Misrepresentation Ordinance (Cap. 
284))
  her the term or notice satisfies the requirement of 
reasonableness,
  court or arbitrator shall have regard in particular (but 
without
  udice to subsection (2) or (4)) to--
  the resources which he could expect to be available to him for 
the
  ose of meeting the liability should it arise; and
  how far it was open to him to cover himself by insurance.
  It is for the person claiming that a contract term or notice
satisfies
  requirement of reasonableness to prove that it does.
  1977 c. 50 s. 11 U. K.]
  Dealing as consumer"
  A party to a contract "deals as consumer" in relation to another
party
  
  he neither makes the contract in the course of a business nor 
holds
  elf out as doing so;
  the other party does make the contract in the course of a 
business;
  
  in the case of a contract governed by the law of sale of goods 
or by
  ion 12, the goods passing under or in pursuance of the contract
are of
  pe ordinarily supplied for private use or consumption.
  Notwithstanding subsection (1), on a sale by auction or by
competitive
  er the buyer is not in any circumstances to be regarded as dealing 
as
  umer.
  It is for the person claiming that a party does not deal as 
consumer
  rove that he does not.
  1977 c. 50 s. 12 U. K.]
  
  arieties of exemption clause
  To the extent that this Ordinance prevents the 
exclusion  or
  riction of any liability it also prevents--
  making the liability or its enforcement subject to 
restrictive or
  ous conditions;
  excluding or restricting any right or remedy in respect 
of the
  ility, or subjecting a person to any prejudice in consequence of 
his
  uing any such right or remedy;
  excluding or restricting rules of evidence or procedure, and (to 
that
  nt) sections 7, 10, 11 and 12 also prevent excluding or 
restricting
  ility by reference to terms and notices which  exclude  or 
restrict
  relevant obligation or duty.
  An agreement in writing to submit present or future 
differences to
  tration is not to be treated under this Ordinance as 
excluding or
  ricting any liability. [cf. 1977 c. 50 s. 13 U. K.]
  ower to amend Schedules 1 and 2
  Legislative Council may by resolution amend Schedules 1 and 2.
 PART II CONTROL OF EXEMPTION CLAUSES
  
  dance of liability for negligence, breach of contract, etc.
  egligence liability
  A person cannot by reference to any contract term or to a notice
given
  ersons generally or to particular persons exclude or 
restrict his
  ility for death or personal injury resulting from negligence.
  In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so 
exclude or
  rict his liability for negligence except in so far as the 
term or
  ce satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
  Where a contract term or notice purports to exclude or 
restrict
  ility for negligence a person's agreement to or awareness of it
is not
  tself to be taken as indicating his voluntary acceptance of any
risk.
  1977 c. 50 s. 2 U. K.]
  iability arising in contract
  This section applies as between contracting parties where one of 
them
  s as consumer or on the other's written standard terms of
business.
  As against that party, the other cannot by reference to any 
contract
  --
  When himself in breach of contract, exclude or restrict any 
liability
  is in respect of the breach; or
  claim to be entitled--
  to render a contractual performance substantially different from 
that
  h was reasonably expected of him; or
  in respect of the whole or any part of his contractual obligation,
to
  er no performance at all,
  pt in so far as (in any of the cases mentioned above 
in this
  ection) the contract term satisfies the requirement of
reasonableness.
  1977 c. 50 s. 3 U. K.]
  nreasonable indemnity clauses
  A person dealing as consumer cannot by reference to any contract 
term
  ade to indemnify another person (whether a party to the 
contract or
  in respect of liability that may be incurred by the 
other for
  igence or breach of contract, except in so far as the contract 
term
  sfies the requirement of reasonableness.
  This section applies whether the liability in question--
  is directly that of the person to be indemnified or is incurred
by him
  riously;
  is to the person dealing as consumer or to someone else. [cf. 1977 
c.
  . 4 U. K.]
  ility arising from sale or supply of goods
  
  "Guarantee" of consumer goods
  In the case of goods of a type ordinarily supplied for private
use or
  umption, where loss or damage--
  arises from the goods proving defective while in consumer use;
and
  results from the negligence of a person concerned in the 
manufacture
  istribution of the goods, liability for the loss or damage 
cannot be
  uded or restricted by reference to any contract term or 
notice
  ained in or operating by reference to a guarantee of the goods.
  For these purposes--
  goods are to be regarded as "in consumer use" when a person is 
using
  , or has them in his possession for use, otherwise than 
exclusively
  the purposes of a business; and
  anything in writing is a guarantee if it contains or 
purports to
  ain some promise or assurance (however worded or 
presented) that
  cts will be made good by complete or partial replacement, 
or by
  ir, monetary compensation or otherwise.
  This section does not apply as between the parties to a contract
under
  n pursuance of which possession or ownership of the goods passed.
  1977 c. 50 s. 5 U. K.]
  Seller's liability
  Liability for breach of the obligations arising from section 14
of the
  of Goods Ordinance (Cap. 26) (seller's implied undertakings 
as to
  e, etc.) cannot be excluded or restricted by reference to any
contract
  .
  As against a person dealing as consumer, liability for breach of 
the
  gations arising from section 15, 16 or 17 of the Sale of 
Goods
  nance (Cap. 26) (seller's implied undertakings as to 
conformity of
  s with description or sample, or as to their quality or fitness
for a
  icular purpose) cannot be excluded or restricted by reference to 
any
  ract term.
  As against a person dealing otherwise than as consumer, the 
liability
  ified in subsection (2) can be excluded or restricted by reference 
to
  ntract term, but only in so far as the term satisfies the 
requirement
  easonableness.
  The liabilities referred to in this section are not only the 
business
  ilities defined by section 2 (2), but include those arising under 
any
  ract of sale of goods. [cf. 1977 c. 50 s. 6 U. K.]
  Miscellaneous contracts under which goods pass
  Where the possession or ownership of goods passes 
under or in
  uance of a contract not governed by the law of sale of 
goods,
  ection (2) to (4) apply in relation to the effect (if any) that 
the
  t or arbitrator is to give to contract terms excluding or 
restricting
  ility for breach of obligation arising by implication of law from 
the
  re of the contract.
  As against a person dealing as consumer, liability in respect of 
the
  's correspondence with description or sample, or their 
quality or
  ess for any particular purpose, cannot be excluded or 
restricted by
  rence to any such term.
  As against a person dealing otherwise than as consumer, that
liability
  be excluded or restricted by reference to such a term, but only
in so
  as the term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
  
  Liability in respect of--
  the right to transfer ownership of the goods, or give possession;
or
  the assurance of quiet possession to a person taking 
goods in
  uance of the contract, cannot be excluded or restricted by 
reference
  ny such term except in so far as the term satisfies the requirement
of
  onableness. [cf. 1977 c. 50 s. 7 U. K.]
  r provisions about contracts
  Effect of breach on "reasonableness" test
  Where for reliance upon it a contract term has to 
satisfy the
  irement of reasonableness, it may be found to do so and be 
given
  ct accordingly notwithstanding that the contract has been 
terminated
  er by breach or by a party electing to treat it as repudiated.
  Where on a breach the contract is nevertheless affirmed by a 
party
  tled to treat as repudiated, this does not of itself 
exclude the
  irement of reasonableness in relation to any contract term.
  1977 c. 50 s. 9 U. K.]
  Evasion by means of secondary contract
  rson is not bound by any contract term prejudicing or taking 
away
  ts of his which arise under, or in connection with the performance
of,
  her contract, so far as those rights extend to the 
enforcement of
  her's liability which this Ordinance prevents that 
other  from
  uding or restricting.
  1977 c. 50 s. 10 U. K.]
  Arbitration agreements
  As against a person dealing as consumer, an agreement to submit
future
  erences to arbitration cannot be enforced except--
  with his written consent signified after the differences in 
question
  arisen; or
  where he has himself had recourse to arbitration in pursuance of 
the
  ement in respect of any differences.
  Subsection (1) does not affect--
  the enforcement of an international arbitration agreement 
within the
  ing of section 2 (1) of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341);
  laced 76 of 1990 s. 2)
  the resolution of differences arising under any contract so far
as it
  by virtue of Schedule 1, excluded from the operation of section
7, 8,
  12.
 PART III CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE CONTROL DOES NOT APPLY
  
  International supply contracts
  The limits imposed by this Ordinance on the extent to which a 
person
  exclude or restrict liability by reference to a contract term do 
not
  y to liability arising under an international supply contract.
  The terms of an international supply contract are not subject to 
any
  irement of reasonableness under section 8 or 9.
  For the purposes of this section, an international supply 
contract
  s a contract--
  that is either a contract of sale of goods or a contract under 
or in
  uance of which the possession or ownership of goods passes;
  that is made by parties whose places of business (or, if they 
have
  , habitual residences) are in the territories of different 
States or
  in and outside Hong Kong; and
  in the case of which--
  the goods in question are, at the time of the conclusion 
of the
  ract, in the course of carriage, or will be carried, 
from the
  itory of one State to the territory of another, or to or from 
Hong
  from or to a place outside Hong Kong; or
  the acts constituting the offer and acceptance have been done in 
the
  itories of different States or in and outside Hong Kong; or
  ) the contract provides for the goods to be delivered to the
territory
  State other than that within whose territory the acts 
constituting
  offer and acceptance were done; or
  the acts constituting the offer and acceptance were done in Hong
Kong
  the contract provides for the goods to be delivered outside Hong
Kong;
  
  the acts constituting the offer and acceptance were done outside 
Hong
  and the contract provides for the goods to be delivered to Hong
Kong.
  1977 c. 50 s. 26 U. K.]
  Choice of law clauses
  Where the proper law of a contract is the law of Hong Kong only 
by
  ce of the parties (and apart from that choice would be the law
of some
  r country) sections 7 to 12 do not operate as part of the proper
law.
  This Ordinance has effect notwithstanding any contract 
term which
  ies or purports to apply the law of some other country, where 
(either
  oth)--
  the term appears to the court or arbitrator to have been 
imposed
  ly or mainly for the purpose of enabling the party imposing 
it to
  e the operation of this Ordinance; or
  in the making of the contract one of the parties dealt as 
consumer,
  he was then habitually resident in Hong Kong, and the essential 

不分页显示   总共2页  1 [2]

  下一页

浅析最高人民法院法函[2004]30号文存在的有关问题

四川成都精济律师事务所 何宁湘律师



  问题的原由
近日在山东人事信息网看到《最高人民法院关于事业单位人事争议案件适用法律等问题的答复(2004-5-27)》,方知最高人民法院有此“司法解释性文件”。但在6月10日出版的第6期总第92期《最高人民法院公报》上没有刊出这一文件,也许下一期会刊出。截止2004年6月23日12:00 中国法院网[法律文库]没有收录,最高人民法院网-[司法行政文件]没有收录,也没有作相关新闻报道。下面刊出该“复函”全文: 


最高人民法院关于事业单位人事争议案件适用法律等问题的答复
法函[2004]30号
  北京市高级人民法院:
  你院《关于审理事业单位人事争议案件如何适用法律及管辖的请示》(京高法[2003]353号)收悉。经研究,答复如下:
  一、《最高人民法院关于人民法院审理事业单位人事争议案件若干问题的规定》(法释[2003]13号)第一条规定,“事业单位与其工作人员之间因辞职、辞退及履行聘用合同所发生的争议,适用《中华人民共和国劳动法》的规定处理。”这里“适用《中华人民共和国劳动法》的规定处理”是指人民法院审理事业单位人事争议案件的程序运用《中华人民共和国劳动法》的相关规定。人民法院对事业单位人事争议案件的实体处理应当适用人事方面的法律规定,但涉及事业单位工作人员劳动权利的内容在人事法律中没有规定的,适用《中华人民共和国劳动法》的有关规定。
  二、事业单位人事争议案件由用人单位或者聘用合同履行地的基层人民法院管辖。
  三、人民法院审理事业单位人事争议案件的案由为“人事争议”。
中华人民共和国最高人民法院
二○○四年四月三十日


  山东人事信息网http://www.sdrs.gov.cn/所作导言:
  针对各地在人事争议处理过程中遇到的有关《劳动法》适用、法院管辖和法院立案案由等问题,5月9日,最高人民法院对北京市高级人民法院《关于审理事业单位人事争议案件如何适用法律及管辖的请示》(京高法[2003]353号)做出了答复。现全文刊登《最高人民法院关于事业单位人事争议案件适用法律等问题的答复》(法函[2004]30号)。
  这个答复是在最高人民法院出台关于人事争议仲裁司法解释确定人事争议仲裁制度与司法制度关系的基础上,对人民法院在审理事业单位人事争议案件时的有关问题进一步做出的明确规定,是关于事业单位人事争议处理的又一个重要的法律性文件,对于进一步确认人事争议仲裁的法律性质和地位,指导我们正确运用相关法律法规都具有十分重要的作用。各级人事部门要积极配合各地人民法院做好文件的执行工作,以推动人事争议仲裁制度的建设和人事争议仲裁工作的开展。
  从导言可知,该《答复》实际行文时间为2004年5月9日。而山东人事信息网是5月27日在网站上公布,至于该《答复》的来源不详。

  该“答复”存在的问题
  【问题1】该《答复》属于对法释[2003]13号这一司法司法解释的“解释”,原本觉得最高审判机关的作出“司法解释的解释”实在是有些可笑。但回头一想,我国现在没有人事法律,没有处理人事争议的法律,2003年9月5日施行的《最高人民法院关于人民法院审理事业单位人事争议案件若干问题的规定》大致上可以看作是关于审理人事争议纠纷案件的“初步法律”,或者说是“准法律”,那么现在作出“替代法律”的司法解释也是“顺理成章”之事,即使退后一步自然宽,仍有一些挥之不去的问题不停闪现,立法与司法解释的机关不同,角度不同,功能不同,司法解释更接近审判实践,比较立法更具体、具有较强的作操性,法释[2003]13号必竟是司法解释,那么怎么回出现“各地在人事争议处理过程中遇到的有关《劳动法》适用、法院管辖和法院立案案由等问题”,由此不难看到,当时出台法释[2003]13号极有可能是应一时急需,难免协调性、准确性与可操作性等方面的问题。
  【问题2】《答复》中第一条答称“人民法院对事业单位人事争议案件的实体处理应当适用人事方面的法律规定”,实质上就是将刚与司法接轨的人事纠纷处理从法释[2003]13号司法解释的状态回到了不是依法办事,而是依据政策办事的老路。原因在于我国目前根本没有一部“人事方面的法律规定”,对此按上层的意思,包括最高人民法院,“人事方面的法律规定”自然就是人事部以及各级人事行政机关,说白了就是“人事厅、局”,他们做出的大量人事政策部门权利文件。这些政策部门权利文件基本上缺少法律依据,往往与法律冲突的、对立的、依据这些文件所作的行政决定,一般是不平等的,是对行政相对人或者事业单位员工一定的权利侵害,如今到了法院,人事争议纠纷诉讼当事人之间的地位仍不平等,人民法院认定事实的正确与否,作出实体裁决的依据仍是原行政机关的政策文件,这样的诉讼已根本没有任何实质意义。在肖扬院长倡导的司法为民的当今,突然冒出一个“复函”,它无疑与“司法为民”指示相悖。
  【问题3】对于《答复》中的“人事方面的法律规定”无非有三类:1、人事方面的行政法规;2、人事方面的行政规章;3、人事方面的规范性文件。实际上,前两者几乎是空白,且我国大致不可能有人事方面的部门法,目前存在并具有“强制执行力”的只有称之“规范性文件”的人事政策文件。由此可见,《答复》实质是让各级法院在审理人事争议纠纷案件时适用人事政策文件,这与我们社会主义法制“以法律为准绳”的原则相悖,以及与人民法院审判中适用法律的基本原则相悖。
  建议对这方面问题,采用最高人民法院《关于审理行政案件适用法律规范问题的座谈会纪要》的法律法规适用原则与规定的架构,并作出相应的规定。
  【问题4】与实体处理相对应,必然有“程序处理”的规定才方为理顺。《答复》规定的“适用《中华人民共和国劳动法》的规定处理”是指人民法院审理事业单位人事争议案件的程序运用《中华人民共和国劳动法》的相关规定,应当就是这部分内容。问题是,人民法院审理人事争议纠纷案件应当在民庭,程序法应适用《民事诉讼法》。《劳动法》是实体法,并非程序法,作出这样的规定实在是出于“审判缺法”的无奈。可以大致作个判断性的理解:《答复》所表达的意思应当是:人民法院在审理人事争议纠纷案件,诉讼当事人提出程序方面问题主张的,应当按照《劳动法》及配套法规规定来进行认定与裁决。这样一来,再次出现让人啼笑皆非,头痛不已的情形,《答复》作“司法解释的解释”仍需要解释。这种情形只有在政策文件,行政文件中发生,最高人民法院所作的司法解释,出现这种情形实属说不过去的。



版权声明:所有资料均为作者提供或网友推荐收集整理而来,仅供爱好者学习和研究使用,版权归原作者所有。
如本站内容有侵犯您的合法权益,请和我们取得联系,我们将立即改正或删除。
京ICP备14017250号-1