证券行政执法当事人承诺制度的实践困境与完善路径
Practical Dilemmas and Improvement Paths of the Securities Administrative Party Commitment System
摘要: 证券行政执法当事人承诺制度是适应全面注册制改革需要而引入的重要合作式监管机制,旨在提升执法效率、减轻市场主体制度性负担并强化投资者权益保护。然而,该制度在实践中呈现出“高预期、低适用”的显著反差。究其根源,既有监管端执法激励缺失与路径依赖的制约,也受制于市场主体成本收益预期不明、参与动力不足,同时投资者在程序中缺乏有效参与和监督机制,影响了制度的公信力与实效。为破解上述困境,本文提出系统化完善路径:一是构建监管与市场双向激励相容的动力机制,推动执法评价体系多元化;二是细化实体与程序规则,明确适用边界与承诺金核定方法,增强制度透明度与可预期性;三是建立投资者适度参与机制,通过程序嵌入与权利保障提升制度公正性与协同效能。通过以上举措,可推动该制度从文本规范转向实践活化,助力构建效率与公平兼顾的现代化证券执法体系。
Abstract: The administrative law enforcement commitment system for securities is an important cooperative regulatory mechanism introduced to meet the needs of the comprehensive registration-based reform. It aims to enhance law enforcement efficiency, reduce the institutional burden on market entities, and strengthen investor protection. However, in practice, the system shows a significant contrast of “high expectations but low application”. The root causes include the lack of law enforcement incentives and path dependence on the regulatory side, as well as the unclear cost-benefit expectations and insufficient participation motivation of market entities. Meanwhile, the lack of effective participation and supervision mechanisms for investors in the process affects the credibility and effectiveness of the system. To address these challenges, this article proposes a systematic improvement path: first, build a two-way incentive-compatible dynamic mechanism between regulation and the market, and promote the diversification of law enforcement evaluation systems; second, refine substantive and procedural rules, clarify the application boundaries and methods for determining commitment funds, and enhance the transparency and predictability of the system; third, establish a moderate investor participation mechanism, and improve the fairness and synergy of the system through procedural embedding and rights protection. Through these measures, the system can be transformed from textual norms to practical activation, and contribute to the construction of a modern securities law enforcement system that balances efficiency and fairness.
文章引用:易茜. 证券行政执法当事人承诺制度的实践困境与完善路径[J]. 法学, 2026, 14(1): 173-177. https://doi.org/10.12677/ojls.2026.141023

参考文献

[1] 叶林. 全面注册制下投资者保护的制度逻辑与发展方向[J]. 证券市场导报, 2024(6): 3-14+69.
[2] 席涛. 证券行政和解制度分析[J]. 比较法研究, 2020(3): 112-126.
[3] 陈洁. 证券行政执法当事人承诺制度新发展[J]. 中国金融, 2024(10): 49-51.
[4] 徐文鸣. 证券行政执法当事人承诺制度的法经济学分析[J]. 华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2024(6): 141-153+201.
[5] 黄行健. 投资者赔偿视角下证券行政执法当事人承诺制度的困境纾解[J]. 黑龙江金融, 2024(5): 55-60.
[6] 黄睿喆. 利益平衡视角下证券行政执法当事人承诺制度的实践检视与完善理路[J]. 投资者, 2025(2): 51-67.
[7] 郭雳. 美国证券欺诈处置中的“公平基金”实践及其启示[J]. 投资者, 2019(4): 64-68.
[8] 白硕, 张辉. 证券监管执法中投资者损害赔偿的实现[J]. 证券市场导报, 2022(11): 72-79.