上市公司独立董事的责任优化与制度适用
Liability Optimization and Institutional Application of Independent Directors of Listed Companies
摘要: 独立董事制度是现代公司治理结构的重要组成部分,在我国,独立董事制度的引入初衷是为了弥补公司内部监督机制的不足,但目前来看,独立董事制度并未完全发挥出其应有的价值。由于独立董事的义务和责任规定泛化以及新旧独立董事制度更替等因素,独立董事制度在权责认定、激励机制以及处罚判决方面的现行规定值得商榷。综合考量域外经验和中国国情,从比较法角度来检讨我国的独董制度的缺陷。为了完善我国独立董事法律责任体系,充分发挥其对上市公司规范运作的作用,应优化责任标准及适用,重视激励机制多样化,引入独董责任限额制度,进而推动上市公司治理结构的完善。
Abstract: The independent director system is an important part of the modern corporate governance structure, in China, the introduction of the independent director system was initially intended to make up for the inadequacy of the company’s internal supervisory mechanism, but at present, the independent director system has not fully exerted its due value. Due to the generalization of the duties and responsibilities of independent directors and the replacement of the old and new independent director systems, the current provisions of the independent director system in terms of the identification of powers and responsibilities, incentive mechanisms and penalties are questionable. Taking into account the overseas experience and China’s national conditions, the shortcomings of China’s independent director system are reviewed from the perspective of comparative law. In order to improve the legal liability system of independent directors in China and give full play to their role in regulating the operation of listed companies, we should optimize the liability standard and its application, pay attention to the diversification of incentive mechanisms, and introduce the liability limitation system for independent directors, so as to promote the improvement of the governance structure of listed companies.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
华尔街曾经的“造假大王”, 令美国证监会蒙羞[Z/OL]. 网易新闻. https://www.163.com/dy/article/J8H0SK3705566Z6B.html, 2024-08-01.
|
|
[2]
|
世通事件[Z/OL]. 百度百科. https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E4%B8%96%E9%80%9A%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6/6679827?fr=ge_ala, 2024-05-10.
|
|
[3]
|
王涌. 独立董事的当责与苛责[J]. 中国法律评论, 2022, 45(3): 64-77.
|
|
[4]
|
郭富青. 我国独立董事的制度悖论、缺陷与解决途径——对“康美药业案”引发的独立董事辞职潮的思考[J]. 学术论坛, 2022, 45(1): 61-73.
|
|
[5]
|
2022年度独立董事行政处罚分析报告[Z/OL]. 微信公众号. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/ziWcWOyxL1lfsy7NwhxfKA, 2023-02-20.
|
|
[6]
|
蒋大兴. “民事赔偿责任优先”抑或“民事诉讼优先”?——“私权优先”应从实体规范向程序规则演进[J]. 中国社会科学院大学学报, 2023, 43(4): 27-45.
|
|
[7]
|
邢会强. 美国如何追究独立董事的法律责任? [Z/OL]. 中国金融服务法制网. http://www.financialservicelaw.com.cn/article/default.asp?id=9956, 2021-03-15.
|
|
[8]
|
王运通, 马黎珺. 金融机构独立董事薪酬激励研究[J]. 金融监管研究, 2022(7): 1-21.
|
|
[9]
|
邢会强. 证券市场虚假陈述中的勤勉尽责标准与抗辩[J]. 清华法学, 2021, 15(5): 69-85.
|
|
[10]
|
平力群. 日本公司治理平成改革评析[J]. 现代日本经济, 2021(3): 68-81.
|
|
[11]
|
张婷婷. 独立董事勤勉义务的边界与追责标准——基于15件独立董事未尽勤勉义务行政处罚案的分析[J]. 法律适用, 2020(2): 84-96.
|
|
[12]
|
张旭. 民事责任、行政责任和刑事责任——三者关系的梳理与探究[J]. 吉林大学社会科学学报, 2012(2): 54-60.
|
|
[13]
|
朱国华, 赵杨. 独立董事勤勉尽责标准研究[J]. 广西社会科学, 2022(12): 108-116.
|
|
[14]
|
梅洁. 独立董事声誉激励研究回顾与展望[J]. 财会通讯: 下, 2017(12): 110-115.
|
|
[15]
|
王琦, 王玉霞, 孟繁锦. 上市公司薪酬激励与独董监督决策研究[J]. 技术经济与管理研究, 2021(4): 46-50.
|
|
[16]
|
马瑞乾. 双重股权公司治理制度改革研究——基于控股股东与独立董事的博弈分析[J]. 金融监管研究, 2023(1): 63-80.
|
|
[17]
|
黄辉. 独立董事的法律义务与责任追究: 国际经验与中国方案[J]. 中外法学, 2023, 35(1): 201-220.
|
|
[18]
|
曾祥生. 董事责任规制的困境与应对——以董事个体差异为视角[J]. 法学杂志, 2022, 43(6): 102-116.
|