摘 要：电子票据在我国兴起以来，传统观点认为电子票据游离于我国现有立法之外，缺少基本的法律规制。但是从电子票据的书面形式、原件和签章三个基本要素进行界定，可以论证电子票据在我国法律框架下的准用，参照国外立法尤其是联合国国际贸易委员会《电子商务示范法》，可以推证电子票据具备票据的基本要件，属于特殊票据，准用于一般票据法定规定。

关键词：电子票据；书面形式；原件；签章；法律准用

引言

17世纪中叶的“真实票据理论”，以及由此引申的“票据自偿性理论”，一直是票据交易的理论基础和论证票据安全性的重要依据。i 而目前随着资本市场的不断深化和完善，票据市场的发展略显滞后，原因在于，在交易数字化的市场背景下，票据仍停留于传统纸质形式。传统票据查询效率低、票据流转和保管过程的风险控制成本高，场外手工交易程序繁冗。虽然能够修正这些不足的电子票据早已应运而生，但是我国现行法律并没有给电子票据明确的法律定位，导致电子票据在我国的现行法律框架下尴尬运行，得不到应有的规范和保护。

一、电子票据的涵义及在我国的发展现状

（一）电子票据的涵义

电子票据是借鉴纸质票据功能，通过数据电文在网络中的信息传递进行钱款转移。ii 目前对电子票据的解释有两种思路：票据电子化和电子化的票据。前者是指依托网络和计算机技术将传统纸质票据的各要素信息转化为电子信息进行传递，以数据电文的形式行使票据行为，实现资金帐户的转移的资金存储和传输过程。后者是指完全脱离传统纸质票据而存在与网络和计算机中的电子信息，其所有的票据行为和业务流程都通过网络传输实现的票据行为承载的电子形式。可称为电子票据的信息层面和货币层面。Iii

笔者认为，电子票据本质还是纸质票据在计算机和网络技术下的形式延伸，仍然是票据的一种，具备纸质票据所有的内涵和外延。

（二）电子票据在我国的发展现状

2005 年，招商银行开发了“票据通”———网上票据业务。随后，工商银行开发了“易付宝“电子票据。2006 年底，民生银行开办了电子汇票业务。

但是，这些电子票据目前只限于各商业银行的网内系统，全国间电子票据流通市场尚未形成。虽然在2003 年6 月30日，“中国票据网”正式启用，为金融机构间票据转贴现、票据回购等业务提供报价、查询服务，标志着我国票据市场电子化开始起步。但也是热闹一时，该网目前只是一个报价系统，未能提供交易功能。

后支票影像交换系统在全国范围内建成推广，是我国借鉴其他国家和地区电子票据发展的经验，实现支票业务电子化的开端。但是，汇票、本票等其余电子票据业务仍然只能局限在各金融机构系统内流转。

二、电子票据在我国现行法律框架下的准用

《票据法》没有对票据概念做明确界定，理论界普遍将其定义为：指出票人依票据法签发的，由本人或委托他人在见票时或者在票载日期无条件支付确定的金额给收款人或持票人的一种有价证券。iv 目前，对电子票据的争议颇多，大多数认为电子票据游离于我国现行法律框架之外。笔者持相反观点。认为电子票据准用于我国现行法律，受法律的规范和保护。

通说认为，票据是一种要式证券，对形式要求非常严格。除票据法另有规定外，不具备法定格式的，不发生票据的效力。v电子票据与现行票据法对票据形式的规定之间的冲突，具体表现在：书面形式、原件和签章三方面。笔者在此论证电子票据在这三方面的法律准用。

（一）票据的书面形式要求

1.传统观点

现行票据法认为，票据是一种书面证券，每一种票据行为都必须以书面形式作成，口头方式不发生票据法上的效力。vi票据行为人依规定在票据的正面、背面或粘单上做记载，不同的记载都有不同的法律效力。中国人民银行对本票、汇票及支票的用纸、格式都有统一的规定。所以，有观点认为《票据法》不承认非纸质的电子票据的支付和结算方式。电子票据脱离了传统的纸质载体，其效力没有在法律上明确规定，没有纳入《票据法》。

2.电子票据书面形式的法律适用

（1）国际立法准用。联合国《电子商务示范法》第6 条规定：“如果一项数据电文所含信息可以调取于日后查用，即满足法律要求的书面形式。”也即，电子商务中的电子传输具有有书面文件同等的法律效力。第5 条规定：“不得仅仅以某项信息采用数据电文形式为理由，而否定其法律效力、有效性或可执行性。”第10 条规定：“如法律要求某些文件、记录或信息须留存，则此种要求可通过留存数据电文的方式予以满足，但要符合下述条件：a、储存或传递该数据电文的办法的可靠性，达到可以调取以备日后查用；b、整性条件：保持信息完整性的办法的可靠性，达到初次形成时的状态；c、安全的签字或类似鉴别发端人的办法。”确立了电子数据在诉讼程序中的证据效力。vii

（2）我国立法准用。我国《合同法》第11 条规定：“书面形式是指合同书、信件和数据电文（包括电报、电传、传真、电子数据交换和电子邮件）等可以有形地表现所载内容的形式。”确立了合同不限于纸质文书，还可以电子数据交换和电子邮件作为其表现形式。中国人民银行1994 年下发的《关于改变电子联行业务处理方式》的通知中规定：“电子支付信息与纸质凭证支付信息具有同等的法律效力。纸质凭证转化为电子信息，电子信息实效，纸凭证失效；电子信息转化为纸凭证，纸凭证生效，电子信息失

效。”确立了电子支付信息和纸质信息的同等适用效力。Viii

综上所述，电子票据中电子数据记载于电磁介质的形式，虽然不同于传统纸面形式，但仍然是纸质票据在信息网络技术中的延伸适用，完全准用于我国《票据法》，应当收到现行法律框架的规范和保护。

（二）票据原件要求

有观点认为，电子票据无法将票据以原件形式传递，受票人接收的只能是以数据方式再现的电子票据，就原件而言，电子票据的流通丧失了法律意义。笔者认为，原件的功能是对票据上的信息的认证，以维护其真实可信性，促进票据的流通安全。具备一定要件的数据电文一样具有原件的效力。Ix

我国《电子签名法》第5 条规定：“符合一定条件的数据电文视为满足法律、法规规定的原件形式要求。”联合国《电子商务示范法》第8 条规定：“如法律要求信息须以其原始形式展现或留存，例如数据电文只要具备如下情况即满足要求：a、有办法可靠地保证该信息首次以其最终形式生成，作为一项数据电文或充当其他用途之时起，该信息就保持了完整性。b、该信息在需要的时候可以展现给人看。”x 这证实了以技术手段核实数据电文的内容，相当与其原件的性质，解决了票据法对票据原件的要求。

（三）票据签章的要求

1.传统观点

票据的严格要式性决定了票据行为“无签章则无责任”。我国《票据法》第4 条规定：“票据出票人制作票据，应当按照法定条件在票据上签章，并按照所记载的事项承担票据责任。持票人形式票据权利，应当按照法定程序在票据上签章，并出示票据。其他票据债务人在票据上签章的，按照票据所记载的事项承担票据责任。”第7 条规定：“票据上的签章，为签名、盖章或者签名加盖章。法人和其他适用票据的单位在票据上签章，为该法人或者该单位的盖章加其法定代表人或者其授权的代理人的签章。在票据上签名，应当为当事人的本名。”因此，有观点认为，我国现行的票据法未明确规定其他形式的签名是否可以产生法律效力。xi

2.电子签名在票据中的法律准用

《票据法》要求的签名和签章，并不局限于手书的纸质签名或签章，满足一定技术条件的电子签名应该得到法律认可和保护。不能因为电子签名因存在于虚拟环境中，就不受法律的认可。

（1）国际立法准用。1995 年美国犹他州制定了《犹他州电子签名法》，成为世界上第一个为电子签名立法的地区，首次承认了电子签名在商业活动中与手写签名具有同等的法律效力。xii联合国的《电子商务示范法》对电子签名的法律效力确定了“功能同等（functional equivalent）”的方法，具体做法是挑出书面形式要求中的基本作用，以其作为标准，一旦数据电文达到这些标准，即可与起着相同作用的相应书面文件一样，享受同等程度的法律认可。xiii 这是消除法律上因虚拟环境产生的不公平待遇的最重要的法律方法。

（2）我国立法准用。2005 年4 月1 日起实施的《电子签名法》使得电子签名在法律上获得了与传统的手写签章有同等效力。该法第13 条规定：“电子签名同时符合下列条件的，视为可靠的电子签名：（一）电子签名制作数据用于电子签名时，属于电子签名人专有；（二）签署时电子签名制作数据仅由电子签名人控制；（三） 签署后对电子签名的任何改动能够被发现；（四）签署后对数据电文内容和形式的任何改动能够被发现。当事人也可以选择使用符合其约定的可靠条件的电子签名。”第14 条“可靠的电子签名与手写签名或者盖章具有同等的法律效力。”2005 年10 月26 日，中国人民银行发布了《电子支付指引》也认可了电子签章的效力。Xiv

一份带有电子签名的文件意味着签署人同意受该文件内容的法律约束，只要电子签名的功能能够满足：a、签名者事后不能否认自己签名的事实；b、任何人均不能伪造该签名；c、如果当事人就签名真伪发生争执，能够由公正的第三方进行裁决，通过验证签名来确认其真伪。这样的电子签名就应该视为和手书签名或签章有同等的法律效果。我国目前的电子票据的交易信息都是通过电子签名加密，经由CA 认证机构认证后传递和识别，通过“非对称密钥加密法”完成的。符合法律规定的技术要求，应当在我国现行法律框架中准用。

三、结语

我国现行法律并没有否认电子票据的书面形式、原件和签章效力，电子票据是传统纸质票据延伸，其行为也是一种严格的要式行为，它具备传统纸质票据所具有的外延和内涵，电子票据准用于我国的现行法律框架。电子票据存在于电子介质中，在互联网上流通，所提供的信息是可视的、真实的、合法的；每份电子票据的签发和流通过程是唯一的，具有排他性，任何伪造、编造、克隆或复制的行为都是非法的，都必须受到法律的严格追究。

当然，随着电子票据市场的发展，我国法律有必要对电子票据的法律地位作出明确界定，对于其技术操作进行严格规范，提供电子票据和纸质票据的统一适用规则。

注释：

[1] 亚当.斯密在《国民财富性质和原因的研究》里，把“票据真实理论”作为指导银行贷款的理论。

[2] 杨路明等编著《电子商务法》，机械工业出版社，2007 年4 月第一版，第54—55 页。

[3] 弋璘、刘畅《电子票据的概念厘清》，载《当代经理人》，2006年6 月。

[4] 王小能编著：《票据法教程》，北京大学出版社，2001 年7 月第二版，第14 页。

[5] 刘心稳著《票据法》，中国政法大学出版社，2007 年8 月第四版，第17 页。

[6] 王小能编著：《票据法教程》，北京大学出版社，2001 年7月第二版，第35 页。

[7] UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce（1996），参见

http：//www.jus.uio.no/lm/pdf/un.electronic.commerce.model.law.1996.pdf。

[8] http：//www.c hinaorg.cn/zcfg/zcfg/2007-12/20/content_5154178.htm。

[9] 王姝《电子票据法律制度研究》，载《鞍山科技大学学报》，第29 卷第1 期，2006 年2 月。

[10] UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce（1996），参见

http：//www.jus.uio.no/lm/pdf/un.electronic.commerce.model.law.1996.pdf。

[11] 竺佳蕾《银行电子票据业务发展存在问题分析及对策研究》，载《金融会计》，2009 年第5 期。

[12] Entrust Securing Digital Identity and Information“Digital Signatures—

Abstract: Since the rise of electronic bills in China, the traditional view holds that electronic bills are detached from existing legislation in China and lack basic legal regulations. However, by defining the three basic elements of electronic bills: written form, original document, and signature, it can be demonstrated that electronic bills are applicable within the legal framework of China. Referring to foreign legislation, especially the United Nations International Trade Commission's Model Law on Electronic Commerce, it can be inferred that electronic bills possess the basic requirements of bills, belong to special bills, and are applicable to general legal provisions for bills.

Keywords: electronic bills; Written form; Original; Signature and seal; Legal application

introduction

The "real bill theory" of the mid-19th century, as well as the derived "bill self compensation theory," have always been the theoretical basis for bill transactions and an important basis for demonstrating the safety of bills. Currently, with the continuous deepening and improvement of the capital market, the development of the bill market is slightly lagging behind. The reason is that in the context of digital trading, bills still remain in traditional paper form. The traditional bill inquiry efficiency is low, the risk control cost of bill circulation and custody process is high, and the off exchange manual trading procedures are cumbersome. Although electronic bills that can correct these shortcomings have long emerged, the current laws in China do not provide a clear legal positioning for electronic bills, resulting in the awkward operation of electronic bills under the current legal framework in China and not receiving the necessary norms and protection.

1. The Meaning and Development Status of Electronic Bills in China

（1） The meaning of electronic bills

Electronic bills refer to the function of paper bills and transfer funds through the transmission of information through data messages on the network. There are currently two approaches to interpreting electronic bills: electronic bills and electronic bills. The former refers to the process of transferring various elements of traditional paper bills into electronic information through the use of network and computer technology, and exercising the bill behavior in the form of data messages to achieve the transfer of fund accounts through fund storage and transmission. The latter refers to the electronic form of electronic information that completely separates from traditional paper bills and exists in the network and computer, and all bill behaviors and business processes are carried by bill behaviors through network transmission. It can be referred to as the information level and currency level of electronic bills. Iii

The author believes that electronic bills are essentially an extension of paper bills in the form of computer and network technology, and are still a type of bill, possessing all the connotations and extensions of paper bills.

（2） The Development Status of Electronic Bills in China

In 2005, China Merchants Bank developed "Bill Connect" - online bill business. Subsequently, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China developed the "Yifubao" electronic bill. At the end of 2006, Minsheng Bank launched an electronic bill business.

However, these electronic bills are currently limited to the online systems of various commercial banks, and the national electronic bill circulation market has not yet formed. Although on June 30, 2003, the "China Bill Network" was officially launched, providing quotation and query services for inter financial institution bill discounting, bill repurchase, and other businesses, marking the beginning of the digitization of China's bill market. But it was also a busy time, and the website is currently only a quotation system that cannot provide transaction functions.

The establishment and promotion of the post check image exchange system nationwide is the beginning for China to learn from the experience of other countries and regions in the development of electronic bills and achieve the digitization of check business. However, other electronic bill businesses such as bills of exchange and promissory notes can still only be limited to circulation within the systems of various financial institutions.

2. The Application of Electronic Instruments under the Current Legal Framework in China

The Negotiable Instruments Law does not provide a clear definition of the concept of negotiable instruments. The theoretical community generally defines it as a type of securities issued by the drawer in accordance with the Negotiable Instruments Law, which unconditionally pays a certain amount to the payee or holder at sight or on the date of the bill. Currently, there are many controversies over electronic bills, with most believing that electronic bills are outside the current legal framework in China. The author holds the opposite view. It is believed that electronic bills are applicable to the current laws of China and are subject to legal norms and protection.

It is generally believed that bills are a formal security with very strict requirements for form. Unless otherwise stipulated in the Negotiable Instruments Law, instruments that do not have a legal format shall not have the validity of the instrument. The conflict between electronic bills and the provisions of the current bill law on the form of bills is manifested in three aspects: written form, original copy, and signature. The author hereby demonstrates the legal application of electronic bills in these three aspects.

（1） Written form requirements for bills

①Traditional viewpoints

The current bill law believes that a bill is a written security, and every bill behavior must be made in written form, and oral means do not have any legal effect on bills. The person responsible for the bill of vi shall make records on the front, back, or sticky note of the bill in accordance with regulations, and different records have different legal effects. The People's Bank of China has unified regulations on the paper and format of promissory notes, bills of exchange, and checks. Therefore, there is a viewpoint that the Negotiable Instruments Law does not recognize the payment and settlement methods of non paper electronic instruments. Electronic bills have separated from traditional paper carriers, and their effectiveness has not been clearly stipulated in the law and has not been included in the Bill Law.

②Legal Application of Electronic Instruments in Written Form

Ⅰ.International legislation applies mutatis mutandis. Article 6 of the United Nations Model Law on Electronic Commerce stipulates: "If the information contained in a data message can be retrieved and used in the future, it is in written form that meets the legal requirements." That is to say, electronic transmission in electronic commerce has the same legal effect as a written document. Article 5 stipulates: "The legal validity, validity, or enforceability of a certain information shall not be denied solely on the grounds that it is in the form of a data message." Article 10 stipulates: If the law requires certain documents, records, or information to be retained, this requirement can be met by retaining data messages, but the following conditions must be met: a) the reliability of the method of storing or transmitting the data message, which can be accessed for future reference; b) the integrity condition: the reliability of the method of maintaining information integrity, which can reach the state when it was first formed; c) a secure signature or similar method of identifying the originator   Established the evidentiary validity of electronic data in litigation proceedings. Vii

Ⅱ.Our country's legislation is applicable. Article 11 of China's Contract Law stipulates that "written form refers to the form of contract, letter and data message (including telegram, telex, fax, Electronic data interchange and e-mail) that can tangibly express the contents contained." It establishes that contracts are not limited to paper documents, but can also be expressed in Electronic data interchange and e-mail. The notice on changing the processing method of electronic interbank business issued by the People's Bank of China in 1994 stipulates that "electronic payment information and paper voucher payment information have the same legal effect. When paper vouchers are converted into electronic information, electronic information becomes effective and paper vouchers become invalid; when electronic information is converted into paper vouchers, paper vouchers become effective and electronic information becomes invalid

Effective Established the equal applicability of electronic payment information and paper information. Viii

In summary, the electronic data recorded in electronic bills in the form of electromagnetic media, although different from traditional paper forms, is still an extension of the application of paper bills in information network technology, fully applicable to China's "Bill Law", and should receive the norms and protection of the current legal framework.

（2） Requirements for original bills

There is a viewpoint that electronic bills cannot be transmitted in the original form, and the recipient can only receive electronic bills that are reproduced in data form. In terms of the original, the circulation of electronic bills loses its legal significance. The author believes that the function of the original document is to authenticate the information on the bill, in order to maintain its authenticity and credibility, and promote the circulation safety of the bill. Data messages with certain requirements have the same validity as original documents. Ix

Article 5 of China's Electronic Signature Law stipulates that "data messages that meet certain conditions shall be deemed to meet the original form requirements stipulated by laws and regulations." Article 8 of the United Nations Model Law on Electronic Commerce stipulates: If the law requires information to be presented or retained in its original form, for example, a data message meets the requirement as long as it has the following conditions: a. There is a reliable way to ensure that the information is first generated in its final form, and from the time it is used as a data message or for other purposes, the information remains intact. b. The information can be presented to people when needed. "x This confirms the use of technical means to verify the content of the data message, Equivalent to the nature of its original, it solves the requirements of the bill law for original bills.

（3） Requirements for bill signature

① Traditional viewpoints

The strict formality of bills determines that if there is no signature, there is no responsibility. Article 4 of China's Negotiable Instruments Law stipulates: "When the issuer of a negotiable instrument makes a negotiable instrument, they shall sign and affix their seal on the instrument in accordance with legal conditions and bear the liability for the instrument in accordance with the matters recorded. The holder of the right to a negotiable instrument shall sign and affix their seal on the instrument in accordance with legal procedures and present the instrument. If other debtors of the instrument sign and affix their seal on the instrument, they shall bear the liability for the instrument in accordance with the matters recorded on the instrument." Article 7 stipulates: The signature on a bill is a signature, seal, or signature plus seal. The signature of a legal person or other applicable unit on a bill is the seal of the legal person or unit plus the signature of its legal representative or authorized agent. The signature on a bill should be the real name of the party involved. Therefore, it is believed that the current bill law in China does not explicitly stipulate whether other forms of signature can have legal effect. Xi

② Legal application of electronic signatures in bills

The signatures and seals required by the Negotiable Instruments Law are not limited to handwritten paper signatures or seals. Electronic signatures that meet certain technical conditions should be recognized and protected by law. Electronic signatures cannot be legally recognized because they exist in a virtual environment.

Ⅰ. International legislation applies mutatis mutandis. In 1995, the state of Utah in the United States enacted the Utah Electronic Signature Act, becoming the first region in the world to legislate for electronic signatures, recognizing for the first time that electronic signatures have the same legal effect as handwritten signatures in commercial activities. The United Nations' Model Law on Electronic Commerce establishes the method of "functional equivalence" for the legal effect of electronic signatures. The specific approach is to select the basic role in the written form requirement and use it as a standard. Once the data message meets these standards, it can enjoy the same level of legal recognition as the corresponding written document that plays the same role. Xiii This is the most important legal method to eliminate unfair treatment caused by virtual environments in law.

Ⅱ. Our country's legislation is applicable. The Electronic Signature Law, which came into effect on April 1, 2005, has given electronic signatures the same legal effect as traditional handwritten signatures. Article 13 of the Law stipulates: "An electronic signature shall be deemed reliable if it meets the following conditions: (1) when the electronic signature creation data is used for electronic signature, it belongs to the exclusive use of the electronic signatory; (2) when the electronic signature creation data is signed, it is only controlled by the electronic signatory; (3) any changes to the electronic signature after signing can be discovered; (4) Any changes to the content and form of the data message after signing can be discovered. The parties may also choose to use electronic signatures that meet their agreed upon reliable conditions Article 14: "Reliable electronic signatures have the same legal effect as handwritten signatures or seals." On October 26, 2005, the People's Bank of China issued the "Electronic Payment Guidelines" and also recognized the effectiveness of electronic signatures. Xiv

A document with an electronic signature means that the signatory agrees to be legally bound by the content of the document, as long as the function of the electronic signature can meet: a. The signatory cannot deny the fact of their signature afterwards; b. No one can forge the signature; c. If there is a dispute between the parties regarding the authenticity of the signature, it can be determined by an impartial third party by verifying the signature to confirm its authenticity. Such electronic signatures should be regarded as having the same legal effect as handwritten signatures or seals. At present, the transaction information of electronic bills in China is encrypted by electronic signature, transmitted and identified after being certified by CA certification authority, and completed by "asymmetric key encryption method". Technical requirements that comply with legal provisions should be applied mutatis mutandis within the current legal framework of China.

3. Conclusion

The current laws in China do not deny the written form, original copy, and signature validity of electronic bills. Electronic bills are an extension of traditional paper bills, and their behavior is also a strict formal behavior. They have the extension and connotation of traditional paper bills, and electronic bills are applicable to the current legal framework in China. Electronic bills exist in electronic media and circulate on the internet, providing information that is visible, real, and legal; The issuance and circulation process of each electronic bill is unique and exclusive, and any act of forging, fabricating, cloning, or copying is illegal and must be strictly pursued by law.

Of course, with the development of the electronic bill market, it is necessary for Chinese law to clearly define the legal status of electronic bills, strictly regulate their technical operations, and provide unified application rules for electronic bills and paper bills.

Comment:

[1] Adam Smith, in his "Study on the Nature and Causes of National Wealth," used the "theory of authenticity of bills" as a guide for bank loans.

[2] Yang Luming et al. edited "E-commerce Law", published by China Machinery Industry Press, April 2007, first edition, pages 54-55.

[3] Yi Lin and Liu Chang, "Clarifying the Concept of Electronic Bills," published in "Contemporary Managers," June 2006.

[4] Wang Xiaoneng, "A Course in Negotiable Instruments Law", Peking University Press, July 2001, 2nd edition, page 14.

[5] Bill Law, written by Liu Xinwen, China University of Political Science and Law Press, August 2007, the fourth edition, page 17.

[6] Wang Xiaoneng, "A Course in Negotiable Instruments Law", Peking University Press, July 2001, 2nd edition, page 35.

[7] UNITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996), see

Http://www.jus. uio. no/lm/pdf/un. electronics. commerce. model. law. 1996.pdf.

[8] Http://www.c hinaorg. cn/zcfg/zcfg/2007-12/20/content_ 5154178.htm.

[9] Wang Shu's "Research on the Legal System of Electronic Instruments", published in Journal of Anshan University of Science and Technology, Volume 29, Issue 1, February 2006.

[10] UNITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996), see

Http://www.jus. uio. no/lm/pdf/un. electronics. commerce. model. law. 1996.pdf.

[11] Zhu Jialei's "Analysis of Problems and Countermeasures for the Development of Bank Electronic Bill Business", published in Financial Accounting, Issue 5, 2009.

[12] Entrust Securing Digital Identity and Information "Digital Signatures -