Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)hpmailerpublished in(发表于) 2013/11/19 11:47:59 Lottery purchase policies should take into account exceptions
Ms Lili Wang
In the latest issue of lottery success rate has reached 1.1% "highly difficult" after Beijing buying lottery will be even more difficult in the coming years--starting in 2014, Beijing car Lottery indicators each year would be higher than the current 240,000 units to reduce 40%.
In order to control air pollution and traffic congestion, and devoting major efforts to developing public transport, total is still had to take steps now to rein in motor vehicles. How to make harder rocking, more equitable, and are nearly three years after the implementation of this policy, its perfect in foothold.
Get shakes, some "special": is progressive or prejudicial to the fair?
Only free lottery, there is no "exceptional circumstances" purchase policy in Beijing, nearly three years after its implementation, we are concerned that this kind of voice--
Motor vehicle on disabled for, improved life quality of meaning far is greater than ordinary people, should holding disabled license of limb residual people giving must of car shake, offers policy, like on this a groups alone quota, and alone queued shake,; some no car family always didn't shake Shang, and needed with car, recommends increased a to no car family for units of shake, area, will Dang period car indicators of must proportion distribution to this shake, pool......
Some people think that policy response to special populations subject to tilt. Some people think that if you have tilt, there are exceptions, then shake the policy established by the "equal opportunity" will be destroyed.
So, reasonable some "special", it must be in the "destruction of fair"?
12th people's Congress, Beijing Jiao Hongchang, Vice President of China University of law school professors, restricting people to buy a car, which is essentially restrict people's right to travel, is a restriction of citizens ' legitimate rights and interests. In restricted mode selection, the "Lottery" is taken in order to achieve a fair way.
Jiao Hongchang said the lottery method is not really fair, there are two indicators, one to see if it does equal protection, without discrimination, the same equal treatment; the second is to give proper care to vulnerable groups. Therefore, car-free families is not to give priority to persons with disabilities, to see whether they were due to take care of vulnerable groups.
Next, is the distinction between standards. People with disabilities, there is such a car and no car classification, based on what? Jiao Hongchang says to consider here is the history of the development process in order to achieve the equal protection of the law on citizens ' right to use vehicles. Original resources sufficient of when, not exists what limit, has car family and sound people (then disabled can applications license of not more) more early to enjoy to has drove of friendly; and Dang road hold plugging, and lane resources tension of when, let lack on road resources early occupies of disabled and no car people in same situation Xia priority purchased, is let more people has opportunities enjoy road resources and traffic friendly. Jiao Hongchang believes that such adjustments to the policy itself, in line with the spirit of the equal protection of the law.
Adjustments to be established on the basis of empirical research. Jiao Hongchang said that currently, how many persons with disabilities, and car-free households? After you feel out the numbers, to make policy adjustments, in line with the principle of maximizing public resources.
Lottery + auctions: Guangzhou approach worthwhile?
Although the sales restriction is imposed on motor vehicle policy, Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou to take in different ways. Beijing free Lottery model, was paid an auction mode of Shanghai, Guangzhou was taken by "Lottery ten auction" model. Judging from the chronology of policy, policies in the wake of the Beijing-Shanghai, Guangzhou, and from the perspective of policy content, fully draw on the experience of Beijing-Shanghai. Some Beijing residents believe that the compromise in Guangzhou, understands the Chinese tradition of moderation, is not as widely criticized auction licence in Shanghai, also does not like the Beijing-"shake" makes people anxious.
Who presided over 10 of the Beijing Municipal People's Congress Wang Limei, Vice President of the China Road Transport Association believes that policy based on the economic equity of the Shanghai, Beijing's policy is based on social justice, Guangzhou's policy is to do both. Three areas of policy choices, each have a taste of urban culture. Fit is the most important, there is nothing better to say, as long as the city people can recognize.
"Guangzhou's policies in the latter, there is experience to draw on, many restrictions of Guangzhou. And restriction of liberty means more, would make one of the disadvantages brought about by means of proper digestion. "Jiao Hongchang believes that limiting car does set limits on the exercise of the right of citizens, and in environment, transportation and other explosive form metropolis, the necessary restrictions to protect the environment for all citizens.
Question is, what kind of restrictions? Paid auction appears to protect the rich; free Lottery seems fair, but did not take into account the special needs of society. For those guys, people worry, construction of the highway, is to serve different needs. Limiting car policies designed, in fact, should also include the principle. Jiao Hongchang is understood, better diversification, and can cater to the interests of the masses.
Of course, travel and property rights, the protection of each and every citizen, are subject to the social realities of public resources as a whole. Jiao Hongchang said that when public resources are particularly scarce, not just those without a car, there are also subject to restrictions. Wang Limei told reporters that London fog in the 30 's of the last century for quite some time, prohibiting motor vehicles into the city, much less new cars, good governance environment, the policy just released. If our cities, the atmosphere, the environment, road conditions and more urgent under the last resort, policies will be more stringent.
A lottery draw widely used: only luck that is fair?
Car buyers, housing, schooling, daycare, "far from adequate", areas of resource constraints, are increasingly using a lottery, draw etc, singles out those "lucky" people. Faced with such a widely used, we cannot help but ask, a lottery is the Almighty? Equal opportunity is to see who is more "luck"?
Jiao Hongchang believes that a lottery method is not the best, is not a panacea, there is no way of approach. Wang Limei believes that the allocation of social resources, regardless of what approach to take, there's a basic principle, that is fair. When resource constraints, in particular, how to make equality of opportunity for all of us? Lottery, queue is the more common choice. When faced with large samples, a lottery than lining up more scientific.
Difficulty of how to avoid a lottery, lottery luck games, lottery, lots more fair and reasonable policies still continue to improve. Universal lottery, draw, to associate with the remedies for exceptions to the rule. Jiao Hongchang says lottery, balloting was the principle requiring benefits for special needs groups, classification and protection, this is a correction to the policy.
"If you only rely on a lottery, draw, and there are no other measures, the policy is problematic. But China's legal construction on a major law enforcement problem in the process, legislation opening a hole, maybe 10,000 exceptions in the law enforcement and from there walked out, rent-seeking privileges may also come out, have the potential to seriously damage the legitimacy of public policies, such as a lottery, is a disservice to the law-abiding citizens, for the rule of law is the negative energy and destruction. "Jiao Hongchang believes that when law enforcement environment is better, and" exceptional "better grasp.
In the expert's view, in addition to how "exceptional" case design, when to introduce exception rules also needed to be weighed.
(Original title: Lottery buyers can have exceptions? )
王丽丽
在最新一期摇号中签率已经达到1.1%的“高难度”后，未来几年北京购车摇号将难上加难——从2014年开始，北京市每年小汽车摇号指标将较目前的24万辆缩减近四成。
为了治理大气污染和交通拥堵，大力发展公共交通、严控机动车总量仍然是目前不得不采取的措施。如何让难上加难的摇号更加公平合理，是这一政策实施近三年后，对其完善的重要立足点。
给摇号搞点“特殊”：是进步还是有损公平？
只有无偿摇号、没有“例外情况”的购车政策，在北京实施近三年后，我们关注到了这样的一些声音——
机动车对残疾人来说，改善生活质量的意义远远大于普通人，应对持残疾人驾照的肢残人给予一定的购车摇号优惠政策，比如对这一群体单独配额、单独排队摇号；有些无车家庭始终没摇上号又急需用车，建议增加一个以无车家庭为单位的摇号专区，将当期购车指标的一定比例分配给这个摇号池……
有些市民认为，政策应对一些特殊人群有所倾斜。也有些市民认为，如果有倾斜、有例外，那么摇号这一政策所建立的“机会公平”将被破坏。
那么，在情理之中搞点“特殊”，就一定是在“破坏公平”吗？
北京市第十二届人大代表、中国政法大学法学院副院长焦洪昌教授认为，限制市民买车，实质上就是限制市民的出行权，是对公民合法权益的一种限制。在限制方式的选择上，“摇号”则是为实现公平而采取的一种方式。
焦洪昌说，摇号的方法是不是真正实现了公平，有两个指标，一要看是不是做到了平等保护、没有歧视、相同情况同等对待；二是要对弱势群体给予适当的照顾。因此，残疾人、无车家庭是不是要优先考虑，就是要看他们是否属于应适当照顾的弱势群体。
接下来，就是区分的标准问题。残疾人和普通人，有车人和无车人这样分类，依据何在？焦洪昌说，这里面要考虑的是历史的发展过程，以实现法律对公民使用车辆权的平等保护。原来资源充足的时候，不存在什么限制，有车家庭和健全人(那时残疾人能申请驾照的不多)更早地享受到了开车的便利；而当道路拥堵、行车资源紧张的时候，让缺乏对道路资源先期占有的残疾人和无车人在相同情况下优先购买，就是让更多人有机会享受道路资源和交通便利。焦洪昌认为，政策本身作这样的调整，符合法律平等保护的精神。
调整要建立在实证调研的基础上。焦洪昌说，目前有多少残疾人和无车家庭？把数字摸清楚之后，才能作政策的调整，这符合公共资源最大化利用的原则。
摇号+拍卖：广州做法值得借鉴？
虽然实行的都是对机动车的限购政策，但北京、上海、广州采取的方式各有不同。北京实行无偿摇号模式，上海搞的是有偿竞拍模式，广州则采取的是“摇号十拍卖”模式。从政策出台的时间顺序来看，广州政策出台在京沪之后，从政策内容看，其充分借鉴了京沪的经验。有些北京市民认为，广州的折中方案，深谙中国传统的中庸之道，既不像上海式拍卖牌照广受诟病，也不像北京式“摇号”让人焦虑。
曾担任10年北京市人大代表的中国道路运输协会副会长王丽梅认为，上海的政策立足于经济上的公平，北京的政策立足于社会公平，广州的政策则是力求两者兼顾。三个地区的政策选择，有着各自的城市文化味道。适合是最重要的，没有什么最好一说，只要这个城市的老百姓能认可。
“可能广州政策出台在后，有经验可供借鉴，广州的限制手段就更多一些。而限制自由的手段多一些，就会使某一种手段所带来的弊端适当消解。”焦洪昌认为，限制买车确实限制了公民权利的行使，而在环境、交通等连连爆表的大都市，必要的限制就是在对全体公民的生存环境进行保护。
问题是，采用什么样的方式进行限制？有偿拍卖，看似在保护富人；无偿摇号，看似公平，但没有照顾到社会上的特殊需求。为那些着急赶路的人，建设了高速公路，就是在照顾不同的需求。限制购车政策的设计，实际上也应包含这样的原理。焦洪昌的理解是，手段多样化一些更好，可以照顾不同群众的利益。
当然，每个公民的出行权和财产权行使、保护，都要服从于整个社会公共资源的现实情况。焦洪昌说，当公共资源特别稀缺，不光是没车的，有车的也要受到限制。王丽梅告诉记者，雾都伦敦在上世纪30年代的相当一段时间里禁止机动车进城，更别说新增车辆了，治理好环境之后，才把政策放开。如果我们城市的大气、环境、道路状况更加紧迫，不得已之下，政策也会更严苛。
摇号抽签广为运用：只看运气这公平吗？
购车、买房、入学、入托，这些“僧多粥少”、资源紧张的领域，越来越多地运用起摇号、抽签等方式，选拔出那些“有运气”的人。面对这样的方式广为使用，我们不禁要问，摇号是万能的吗？机会公平就是看谁更有“运气”吗？
焦洪昌认为，摇号方法不是最好的，不是万能的，是没有办法的办法。王丽梅认为，对配置社会资源来说，无论采取什么方式，都有个基本原则，就是要公平。尤其是当资源紧缺时，如何使所有人的机会均等？摇号、排队都是比较常见的选择。面对大样本的时候，摇号比排队更科学。
如何避免将摇号、抽签的难度变为运气的比拼，让摇号、抽签更加公平合理，相关政策仍有待继续完善。普遍性的摇号、抽签，要与对例外情况的补救规则相关联。焦洪昌说，摇号、抽签是原则，对特别需要照顾的、需要优惠的群体，要分类保护，这是对政策的矫正。
“如果只靠摇号、抽签，没有其他措施，这个政策是有问题的。但中国法治建设过程中存在的难题主要在执法上，立法上开了一个口子，在执法中也许一万个例外都会从那里走出去了，寻租特权也可能出来了，有可能严重损害摇号等公共政策的正当性，对守法的公民是一种伤害，对法治则是负能量和破坏。”焦洪昌认为，当执法环境比较好的时候，对“例外”就比较好把握。
在专家看来，除了怎样对“例外”情况进行设计之外，何时出台例外规则也需权衡。
(原标题：摇号式购车能不能有例外？)
赞