学位论文|INFORMATION
丁甫久:论对行政权的监督与制约
管理员 发布时间:2003-06-02 14:43  点击:5081

题 名  论对行政权的监督与制约  
作 者  丁甫久  
作者单位  吉林大学,法学院,长春市 130012  
专 业  法学理论  
指导教师  崔卓兰  
学位级别  303  
馆藏索取号  3990403  
中文文摘  在古代的传统社会中,行政权力是高度集中统一的君权的核心与主要行使方式,是集立法权、行政权、司法权于一体的权力。资本主义产生后,随着“权力分治”等理论与实践的发展,行政权力逐渐由君主手中至高无尚的私物,驱动全部国家活动的轴心,转化为与一般立法、司法权力相对应的公共权力的一种。
洛克最早提出来了行政权的概念,孟德斯鸠在洛克分权学说的基础上使该学说进一步完善,把国家权力分为立法权、行政权和司法权。行政权就是行政机关代表国家强制被管理者服从的力量。
行政权由于现代社会的高速发展和特有的能动执行性,不断地向立法和司法领域扩张,出现了行政立法和行政司法行为。
政侵权就是行政机关及其工作人员侵犯公民、法人及其他社会组织合法权益的行为。其表现多种多样,如因主要证据不足做出的行为、适用法律错误的行为、违反法律程序的行为、超越职权的行为、滥用职权的行为以及不履行或拖延履行法定责任的行为等等。在现实生活中,许多行政侵权行为的发生多为公务员在管理活动中造成的,其中最为常见的是滥用职权行为。
滥用职权是行政违法的一种表现形式,它必然直接或间接地侵犯公民、法人的合法权益,从而构成行政侵权行为。滥用职权表现为不正当地行使权力,是一种行政违法行为,而不是行政不当行为,可发生在自由裁量权限范围内。我国作为行政复议和行政诉讼撤销对象之一的行政滥用职权的表现,主要有下列六种:第一因受不正当动机和目的支配,致使行为背离法定目的和利益。第二,因不合法考虑致使行为结果失去准确性。第三,任意无常,违反同一性和平等性等。国外把这叫做“不遵循既成的先例和惯例的行为”。第四,强人所难,违背客观性,这里是指行政主体所作行政行为要求相对人履行一种客观上无法履行的义务。第五,不正当的迟延或不作为。第六,不正当的步骤和方式。这是一种程序上的滥用职权。所以公务员滥用权为导致结果之一就是行政侵权。
对行政权进行监督制约是由其自身的侵犯性、扩张性、随意性、缺少自控意识和自律,机制的性质特点决定的。由于行政权自身的性质特点,即使在民主政治制度比较发达的现代国家,也难以根本杜绝行政权力被滥用的现象。因此,行政机关必须享有权力,其权力的运用必须受到监督和制约,这是现代社会维护行政相对人合法权利(益),维护社会稳定,保持社会正常发展的需要。
尽管我国现代行政法体系中的三个组成部分对行政权具有不同的制约作用,而且,在整个社会已初步形成了一个主体众多、范围广泛、形式多样的由社会各种力量组成的行政权监督体系,但实际上对行政权的监督制约环节还存在许多不足,其中对行政权运作程序和公务员的监督制约尤其显得薄弱无力。在行政权的运作程序方面,我国缺少一部统一的行政程序法典,在宪法和法律中缺少有关行政程序基本原则的规定,传统的行政程序不仅缺乏对行政权主体违反程序义务的规定,而且缺乏行政程序的透明度。在对公务员的监督制约方面,我国现行法律只注重监督制约行政机关,而忽略了公务员的因素。因此,一方面,要认清制定行政程序法的重要性,把握行政程序的特点和功能,制定行政程序法,健全完善行政程序;另一方面,要加强公务员的选拨和培训,强化公务员的个人赔偿责任。
我国《行政诉讼法》和《国家赔偿法》对于公务员个人的法律责任问题都有所涉及,但尚有三个方面的不足:第一,行政机关在行政诉讼中败诉承担赔偿责任后,行政机关公务员个人的法律责任只限于一定的经济赔偿方面的责任,而对其他责任则没有涉及到。第二,《行政诉讼法》上的经济赔偿责任尚只限于行政机关公务员有故意和重大过失的情况。第三,导致行政侵权赔偿、特别是对公务员个人的追偿客观实在地落实到位非常困难。而且,这种追偿由于其非公开性、非法律性、非充分性而对公务员的约束为较为薄弱。因此,有必要严格区分行政责任,一改过去追诉对象和赔偿对象都是行政机关的情况,将公务员直接摆向“前台”,即直接将公务员作为追诉对象和承担赔偿责任的对象,设立一种公务员个人赔偿责任制一行政特别赔偿程序。这种特别程序应包括以下几个主要内容:第一、诉讼主体的特殊性。原告为合法权益受到损害的行政相对人,但被告则应突破现行立法规定,建立共同责任主体制度。即行政机关和公务员共同承担因行政侵权行为而引起的法律责任,改变目前赔偿责任主体唯一性的模式。这种共同责任制仍保留行政机关的责任。在此基础上增加公务员的直接责任。在行政诉讼中合法权益受到侵害的行政相对人有权选择行政机关作为被告,使其承担行政责任和赔偿责任;同时还有权选择行政机关和公务员作为共同被告,这就是赔偿特别程序诉讼主体的特别所在。将公务员与行政机关作为共同被告的目的就是“让内部追偿责任”外在化、程序化、公开化,以达到督促公务员个人依法行政的目的。第二、举证责任和归责原则的特殊性。针对行政侵权行为引起的行政赔偿诉讼,行政责任之诉讼仍然按《行政诉讼法》规定,实行行政机关负担举证责任原则,对公务员的赔偿责任之诉,更加重公务员的举证责任。在归责原则上不能适用一般的过错责任原则,而应适用“过错推定”原则。这有利于保护公民、法人或其他组织的合法权益,有利于督促公务员更加谨慎、勤勉、廉洁地依法办事。第三、只能采用合议制。第四、提高审级。赔偿特别程序,从功能性质上讲,就是直接追究公务员个人的行政违法责任,及时纠正行政违法行为,从目的上讲,就是监督控制行政机关以及行政机关工作人员依法行政,正确行使行政权力。健全完善赔偿责任的意义在于:第一,有利于促进国家行政机关及其工作人员的勤政、廉政和依法行政。第二,有利于切实保障公民权利,充分发挥行政职权的功能。第三,有助于充分发挥人民法院、人民检察院监督行政执法主体依法行政的作用。

英文文摘  In a traditional society of the ancient times, administrative power, as the core of the highly organized and united monarchical power and one of the major means for its functioning, is inclusive of legislative power, executive power and judicial power Ever since the emergence of capitalism, along with the development of the theory of "power division", administrative power has been gradually turned from the private matter in the hands of the monarch and the axis for the activities of a nation into one type of public power corresponding to legislative power, judicial power figured out in their general sense.
Administrative tort is usually taken to mean the infringement act on the part of the administrative institutions and administrative officials who infringe on the legal tights of citizens, legal bodies, and many other social organizations. It finds its full expression in such acts as lack of critical testimony, application of improper law violation of lawful procedures overstepping and abusing one''s authority, failing to fulfill or delaying fulfilling one''s legal responsibilities etc. In day-to-day life, many administrative infringement acts occur in the course of the management activities of the public officials.
Abusing one''s authority is the violation of law with respect to administration. It is certain to directly or indirectly infringe on the legal lights of citizens and legal bodies, thus constituting an administrative infringement act. It is the violation of law, not an improper administrative act. Taken together, as many as six types of abusing one''s authority have been to date identified and studied. It is worthwhile to mention that administrative supervision has been developed on the ground of such features of administrative power as infringement, expansion, randomness, lack of self-control consciousness and self-discipline mechanism. Seeing that administrative institutions possess power, it is suggested that the exercise of administrative power be brought under supervision.
True, the three branches of the system of administrative law in China do contribute more or less to the restriction of administrative power. It is also true that at present, a system of administrative supervision has been developed in the society. Yet, there do exist many inadequacies. No such dictionary as that of administrative procedures has ever been published in China. To worsen the matter, administrative law in China tends to supervise its administrative institutions, but ignores the cultivation of the qualities of its public officials. It thus follows that efforts should be made to perfect administrative procedures on the one hand, and to improve the selection and cultivation of public officials on the other.
Issues of legal responsibilities of public officials have been touched upon in Administrative Procedures Law and Compensation Law of P R.C.
In view of all these facts, it is suggested that an administrative compensation system be established. The system is composed of special procedures for compensation.
It should be borne in mind that it is necessary and significant to improve and perfect the system of compensating responsibilities for it will do good to the public officials'' being industrious, clean-handed, acting in accordance with law, it will also do good to safeguarding the rights of citizens, as well as exercising the function of administrative power to the full. Last but not least is that it is instrumental in fully exercising the function of people''s courts and people''s procuratorates for superintending the administrative work of administrative institutions at all levels.



关键词  行政权,公务员,监督制约,自由词  
分类标识  D(9)31  
论文注解日期  19990415  
总页数  52P

文献数据中心|DATA CENTER

© 2009-2024 吉林大学理论法学研究中心版权所有 请勿侵权 吉ICP备06002985号-2

地址:中国吉林省长春市前进大街2699号吉林大学理论法学研究中心 邮编:130012 电话:0431-85166329 Power by leeyc