中國大陸外國投資法國家安全審查制度之研究

Abstract

在經濟全球化的時代，外國直接、間接投資及企業間之併購行為紛紛崛起，然而外資湧入的同時亦時常對本國產業造成衝擊，因此為防止外資行為對本國企業造成威脅，各國相繼建立起對外國投資行為之「國家安全審查程序」作為外資進入本國市場的門檻，中國亦於2015年1月19日公佈之《中華人民共和國外國投資法（草案徵求意見稿）》中，設置國家安全審查制度，顯見該制度對中國之重要。\n 在「國家安全」之界定上，於《外資法草案》中增設概括條款，以彌補過去單純採取列舉式立法，所存在之審查範圍過於限縮缺陷。其次，在「外國投資者」之定義上，外國自然人投資者之認定有別於多數國家採用多重標準予以認定，其係單純以國籍作為認定標準，另於外國實體之認定上，為適應現今新形態之商業模式，參考外國法納入實質認定標準，彌補過去之立法漏洞，最後在「審查機構」之組成和建置上，則係由國務院建立外國投資國家安全審查部際聯席會議，作為主要審查機構。\n 惟於《外資法草案》雖解決許多過去立法之缺陷，卻仍存審查機構間權責不明、審查標準過於模糊及司法救濟缺位等問題，故宜參考美國外國投資委員會之組成結構，並增設監督機構，避免審查機構之獨斷。此外，該制度中更應加強對於外國投資者權益之保護，於審查標準中，重要名詞之界定仍存在模糊不清之情形，有待立法者對之明確定義，另在投資者救濟管道之設置上，於現行草案中付之闕如，應加以補正以符合程序正義之要求，如此方能同時兼顧保護國家經濟安全及促進國內經濟發展之目的。

With the coming of economic globalization, a wide array of foreign investments, such as direct and indirect investments as well as enterprises mergers and acquisition, increases. However, these also pose a menace to domestic industry and even national security. As a result, national security reviews of foreign investments which aim to prevent this serious situation grow more prevalent. Following this trend, Mainland China also releases a draft version of Foreign Investment Law and a related Explanatory Note on January 19, 2015 to include national security reviews in it.\n\nThe definition and range of national security is crucial. In order to solve the problems from enumerating which kind of investment is related to national security, China adds a general clause in the draft. In regard to the definition of foreign investor, it is divided into two categories, natural person and foreign entity. The former is determined merely by his or her nationality and the latter is determined not only by its place of registration but also by the actual controllers behind that foreign entity in response to the increasingly new business models. Furthermore, the draft appoints the State Council to establish an inter-ministerial joint committee to be responsible for the foreign investment national security review.\n\nHowever, there are some drawbacks in this draft, such as the unclear distinction of responsibility and accountability between the authorities, the ambiguities in the standard of review and the difficulties of judicial remedy. As a result, emulating the merits in the regulations on national security reviews in the USA and including the protection of investors are beneficial to solve these problems.