论文部分内容阅读
作为市场规制法的价格法,由于在其实施上体现着浓重的行政主导性特征,因此当消费者以堂吉诃德式的悲壮对早已为人所诟病的价格决策听证制度提起几乎不可能胜诉的诉讼时,既暴露了我国当前“政企同盟”模式下的价格决策听证公共实施机制的异化,也凸显了价格决策听证私人实施的理论困境。因而,积极的选择性激励是保障价格决策听证私人实施的动力机制。当然,这也应该成为《政府制定价格听证办法》(征求意见稿)完善的方向。
As the price law of the law of market regulation, it embodies the strong executive-led characteristics in its implementation. Therefore, when the quixotic style of consumers is almost impossible to win, In the litigation, it not only exposed the alienation of the public implementation mechanism of price decision hearing under the current model of “government-enterprise alliance”, but also highlighted the theoretical predicament of the private implementation of price decision hearing. Thus, positive selective incentives are the driving force behind the private implementation of the price decision hearing. Of course, this should also become a perfect direction for the “Measures for the Government to formulate a price hearing” (draft for comments).