舒某抢黄灯案及公安部新规评析
发布时间：2019-04-04 07:52
【摘要】：在我国，目前不管是道路交通执法机关,还是人民法院在审理抢黄灯案件时均存在困惑。本案中，，双方就抢黄灯行是否违法以及行政法律可否类推适用产生争议。争议产生的根源在于目前道路交通法律、法规相关条文语义含糊不清和对法律类推适用原理的理解不透。解决这个争议最好的方法就是对法律、法规和类推原则予以深入解析。 首先，根据对现行有效的《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法》以及《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法实施条例》条文的文意解释、目的解释、历史解释，我们可知上述法律、法规早就将抢黄灯行为予以了禁止，抢黄灯行为认定违法有法律依据。 其次，因为禁止类推原则仅仅只是刑事法律原则而非行政法律原则，禁止类推意在保护法益免遭非法侵害而对法益能予以提前保护。行政法律侵害的公民法益且容易修复、救济，这一点与刑法有天壤之别，也正是这一区别才使得行政法益未必要提前保护，再加上行政执法的面广、点多，法律本身的滞后性和抽象规则的特征，需要行政法法规类推适用，所以行政法律在本案类推适用有其正当性。 最后，公安部在《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法》以及《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法实施条例》规定范围内修订《机动车驾驶证申领和适用规定》应视为下位法对上位法的补充与解释，新法规的合理性与合法性也不存在疑问。
[Abstract]:In our country, both the road traffic law enforcement organ and the people's court are confused when they try the case of robbing yellow lamp. In this case, the two sides of the yellow lights whether illegal and administrative law can be comparable to the application of controversy. The origin of the dispute lies in the present road traffic law, the semantic ambiguity of the relevant provisions of the regulations and the unclear understanding of the principle of the application of the law analogy. The best way to resolve this dispute is to go deep into the laws, regulations, and analogies. First of all, according to the textual interpretation of the provisions of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China and the implementing regulations of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China, the purpose and historical interpretation of the provisions of the Law of the people's Republic of China are known to us. The law has long banned the act of robbing yellow lamps, and the act of robbing yellow lamps has a legal basis for determining that it is illegal. Secondly, because the principle of prohibition of analogy is only the principle of criminal law rather than the principle of administrative law, the prohibition of analogy is to protect the interests of law from illegal infringement and protect the interests of law in advance. The legal interests of citizens who are infringed by administrative laws are easy to repair and remedy. This is quite different from the criminal law, and it is this distinction that makes administrative legal interests not necessarily protected in advance. In addition, the scope of administrative law enforcement is wide, and there are many points. The lag of law itself and the characteristics of abstract rules need to be applied by analogy of administrative laws and regulations, so administrative law has its legitimacy in the application of analogy of administrative law in this case. Last, The revision by the Ministry of Public Security within the scope of the provisions of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China and the implementing regulations of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China on the Application and Application of Motor vehicle driving licenses shall be regarded as the subordinate Law Supplement and interpretation of the law of supremacy, There is no doubt about the reasonableness and legality of the new regulations.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D920.5;D922.14
本文编号：2453623
[Abstract]:In our country, both the road traffic law enforcement organ and the people's court are confused when they try the case of robbing yellow lamp. In this case, the two sides of the yellow lights whether illegal and administrative law can be comparable to the application of controversy. The origin of the dispute lies in the present road traffic law, the semantic ambiguity of the relevant provisions of the regulations and the unclear understanding of the principle of the application of the law analogy. The best way to resolve this dispute is to go deep into the laws, regulations, and analogies. First of all, according to the textual interpretation of the provisions of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China and the implementing regulations of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China, the purpose and historical interpretation of the provisions of the Law of the people's Republic of China are known to us. The law has long banned the act of robbing yellow lamps, and the act of robbing yellow lamps has a legal basis for determining that it is illegal. Secondly, because the principle of prohibition of analogy is only the principle of criminal law rather than the principle of administrative law, the prohibition of analogy is to protect the interests of law from illegal infringement and protect the interests of law in advance. The legal interests of citizens who are infringed by administrative laws are easy to repair and remedy. This is quite different from the criminal law, and it is this distinction that makes administrative legal interests not necessarily protected in advance. In addition, the scope of administrative law enforcement is wide, and there are many points. The lag of law itself and the characteristics of abstract rules need to be applied by analogy of administrative laws and regulations, so administrative law has its legitimacy in the application of analogy of administrative law in this case. Last, The revision by the Ministry of Public Security within the scope of the provisions of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China and the implementing regulations of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the people's Republic of China on the Application and Application of Motor vehicle driving licenses shall be regarded as the subordinate Law Supplement and interpretation of the law of supremacy, There is no doubt about the reasonableness and legality of the new regulations.
【学位授予单位】：湖南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D920.5;D922.14
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前1条
1 陈志军;;刑法司法解释应坚持反对类推解释原则[J];中国人民公安大学学报(社会科学版);2006年02期
本文编号：2453623
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/fashilw/2453623.html
