从各国的法治经验来看,立法机关可以基于行使自身职能的需要而通过其所属的委员会行使一定的调查权,通过要求当事人出席而获取相关的证据或材料。对于立法机关调查权的界限,由于制度差异而存在诸多争论。立法机关调查权界限的确定并没有可统一适用的标准,而要根据各国制度的不同特点区别对待。基于香港政制的特殊性,香港立法会调查权界限的确立,也应该在逻辑上与之相契合。通过比较英国、美国议会调查权的实践并参照其他国家的相关经验,可以认为,以香港独特的行政主导制为基础,依据香港《基本法》的具体规定,香港立法会调查权的行使应该遵循授权性、辅助性、谦抑性、可审查性等原则,从而达到香港政制中行政权、立法权与司法权的有机平衡。 Judging from the experience of the rule of law in various countries, the legislature may exercise certain investigative powers through its subordinate committees based on the needs of exercising its own functions and obtain relevant evidence or materials by requiring the parties to attend. There are many controversies over the limits of the investigative powers of the legislature due to differences in systems. Legislative authorities determine the boundaries of investigative power and there is no uniform applicable standards, but according to the different characteristics of the system of different countries. Due to the particularity of Hong Kong’s constitutional system, the establishment of the boundary of investigative powers of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong should also logically coincide with it. By comparing the practice of investigative powers in the United Kingdom and the United States with reference to the experience of other countries, it can be considered that based on Hong Kong’s unique executive-led system and in accordance with the specific provisions of the Basic Law of Hong Kong, the exercise of the investigative power of the Legislative Council in Hong Kong should follow the authorization Sexuality, supportiveness, modesty, reviewability and other principles, so as to achieve the organic balance between the executive power, legislative power and judicial power in Hong Kong’s constitutional government.