The Identification Standard,Operation Mechanism and Legal Regulation of Punishment for"Notification of Criticism"
Administrative Sanctioning Law (revised in 2021) has incorporated"notification of criticism"into the types of clauses,theoretically filling the gap in the statutory penalty types for reputational penalties ( or honor penal-ties),and standardizing the establishment and implementation of such penalties from the legislative source,thereby maximizing the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties concerned. However,the original con-text for the application of"notification of criticism"was extremely broad,and before it was officially included in the types of administrative penalties,it had been often used as an internal management measure within organizations,an internal personnel disciplinary action within administrative organs,or simply as a type of official document used between party and government organs. Therefore,the question arising from the legislative amendments is whether there will be issues with the smooth or rational connection of legal norms themselves when the Administrative Sanc-tioning Law (revised in 2021) indiscriminately incorporates all sanctions named"notification of criticism"into the current penalty system. It is necessary to clarify the following two basic issues:First,there has always been a dis-pute between formalism and substantivism in the interpretation of penalty types,which means that there are also two modes of interpretation for punishment for"notification of criticism",namely the narrow and the substantive,and a response to this fundamental issue should be made. Second,as a concept in academic classification,punishment for"notification of criticism"exhibits several special characteristics in terms of behavioral structure and consequences compared to other types of penalties. In addition,to effectively alleviate the game relationship between complex and diverse administrative tasks and limited law enforcement resources,many local administrative organs have been con-tinuously seeking governance methods that are low-cost but effective in their law enforcement practices,with"noti-fication of criticism"being a typical representative and widely favored by administrative organs across various re-gions. That is,administrative organs publicly disclose illegal facts within a specific or entire society,using the ex-clusion and spontaneous choices of the public to achieve the purpose of punishing violators. Especially in the net-work data environment where information transmission is ubiquitous,the spread of adverse information can reach in a matter of seconds,and consequently the resulting personal information leaks and a series of social sanctions have also attracted the attention and concern of the academic community. In summary,there are two types of alienation phenomena that stand out the most:one is the absence of sanctionative effects;the other is the triggering of nega-tive regulatory effects. The reasons for this are related to the following elements regarding the punishment for"notifi-cation of criticism"in law enforcement practice:First,the scope and precision of the transmission of illegal infor-mation,involving the range and content of the notification of illegal information. Second,the role of social evalua-tion and sanctions,reflected in the content and frequency of spillover sanctions. To fully respond to these risks,ef-forts should be made to strengthen the legal regulation of the application of punishment for"notification of criticism"by standardizing the scope of illegal information notification ( content),eliminating unreasonable evalua-tion factors,and controlling the extent of social sanctions.
"notification of criticism"administrative punishmentreputational punishmentdisclosure of illegal informationinformation regulation
万方数据
