电商经济发展视角下电商平台责任的程序优化

Procedural Optimization of E-Commerce Platform Liability from the Perspective of E-Commerce Economic Development

摘要: 立足电商经济高质量发展需求，破解传统民事程序与电商平台责任治理之间的结构性矛盾。本文采用文献研究与跨学科分析方法，以信息不对称理论为主线，剖析不同类型电商平台的信息结构差异及其对程序治理的影响，审视当前平台责任在诉讼主体地位、举证责任、规则审查、纠纷解决等方面的困境成因。研究表明，传统程序规则未能匹配电商平台准监管者角色与信息枢纽地位，导致责任认定标准模糊、举证体系失衡、平台规则审查尺度不一、纠纷解决效率偏低等问题。其根源在于传统程序假设与电商经济现实脱节、实体法与程序法衔接不畅。优化路径应以矫正信息不对称、推动程序适配为核心，构建业态化责任认定指引、阶梯式举证责任体系、区分属性的规则审查机制及高效协同的纠纷解决与数字化程序体系，实现市场公平、产业效率与法治保障的统一。

Abstract: Based on the demand for high-quality development of the e-commerce economy, this paper aims to solve the structural contradiction between traditional civil procedures and the responsibility governance of e-commerce platforms. Using literature research and interdisciplinary analysis methods, this paper takes the theory of information asymmetry as the main line, analyzes the differences in information structures of different types of e-commerce platforms and their impact on procedural governance, and examines the causes of current platform responsibilities’ predicaments in terms of litigation subject status, burden of proof, rule review, and dispute resolution. The research shows that traditional procedural rules fail to match the role of e-commerce platforms as quasi-regulators and their information hub status, resulting in ambiguous liability determination standards, imbalanced proof system, inconsistent review scales of platform rules, and low efficiency in dispute resolution. The root cause lies in the disconnection between traditional procedural assumptions and the reality of the e-commerce economy, as well as the poor connection between substantive law and procedural law. The optimization path should focus on correcting information asymmetry and promoting procedural adaptation, and establish a diversified responsibility determination guidance, a stepped burden of proof system, a rule review mechanism with differentiated attributes, and an efficient and collaborative dispute resolution and digital procedural system to achieve the unity of market fairness, industrial efficiency, and legal protection.