行政机关负责人出庭应诉制度研究

发布时间：2018-06-01 15:16

本文选题：行政机关负责人 + 出庭应诉　；参考：《山西财经大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：行政机关负责人出庭应诉是行政诉讼法的一个重要议题。2015年新《行政诉讼法》的修改和实施,是我国首次以立法的形式对行政机关负责人出庭应诉制度进行规定。对于行政机关负责人出庭应诉制度的完善,既能够保障司法权威,又可以推进依法行政和法治政府的建设。域外国家的先进经验为我国行政行政机关负责人出庭应诉提供了有益的指引。其中,德国的行政法院法规定为了了解事实状况,审理案件,法院有权要求行政诉讼被告派出官员或雇员出庭应诉,并在其应到场而不到场的情况下做出处罚。日本具有特色的检察官应诉制度,在庭审活动中依托检察权既配合又限制行政权的方式进行诉讼活动。然而,我国行政机关负责人出庭应诉的现状不容乐观,截止到目前还没有对行政机关负责人出庭应诉制度作出统一的规定,同时不同的地方法规对行政机关负责人出庭应诉的规定也存在很大差异。对行政机关负责人出庭应诉的立法和实施现状分析之后可以得出如下问题:1,行政负责人的概念界定不一;2,应出庭案件的类型规定不明确;3,出庭的具体要求不明确;4,负责人不能出庭应诉的理由缺失;5,不能出庭的法律责任规定模糊,以上是立法上存在的问题。对于实施上存在的问题包括:1,整体出庭率偏低且地区差异性明显;2,行政机关负责人出庭难度大;3,行政权对司法权的干涉。我国需要在尊重国情的基础上,吸收他国的先进经验,弥补行政机关负责人出庭应诉中的不足。对此,本文从以下几方面提供了建议:第一,完善立法。明确行政机关机关负责人出庭应诉的主体,界定出庭应诉的案件类型以及出庭的具体要求。在行政机关负责人不出庭的情况下,明确理由以及完善对其责任的追究。第二,细化行政机关负责人出庭应诉的法律实施。在提高行政诉讼管辖级别下,用司法权限制行政权,同时赋予法院自由裁量权,建立法院裁定其出庭案件的机制。第三,健全行政机关负责人出庭应诉的外部保障机制,通过对行政机关负责人进行培训等,增强其法律知识,并且建立公开的考核机制。本文运用了文本分析法、比较分析法和个案观察法对行政机关负责人出庭应诉进行了梳理和研究。在开放合作型审判模式的大背景下,行政机关负责人出庭应诉制度应当成为行政相对人保护合法权益的手段。行政机关负责人出庭应诉制度的研究目的就是为了满足行政相对人的合理诉求,实质性解决行政争议,优化行政审判环境。
[Abstract]:It is an important topic in the Administrative procedure Law that the principal of the administrative organ appear in court. The revision and implementation of the new Administrative procedure Law in 2015 is the first time that the system of the chief executive of the administrative organ appearing in court is regulated in the form of legislation in our country. The perfection of the system of chief executives appearing in court can not only guarantee the judicial authority, but also promote the construction of the administration by law and the rule of law. The advanced experience of foreign countries provides beneficial guidance for the principal of administrative organs to appear in court. Among them, the administrative court law of Germany provides that in order to understand the facts and hear the case, the court has the power to ask the defendant to send an official or employee to appear in the case of administrative proceedings, and to punish him if he should be present but not present. Japan's characteristic procurator response system relies on procuratorial power to cooperate with and restrict administrative power in court proceedings. However, the present situation of the chief executives of administrative organs appearing in court in our country is not optimistic. Up to now, there is no unified regulation on the system of the chief executives of administrative organs appearing in court. At the same time, different local laws and regulations on the administrative organs appear in court provisions are also very different. After analyzing the current situation of the legislation and implementation of the principal of the administrative organ appearing in court, we can get the following question: 1: 1, the concept of the chief executive is not defined differently, the type of the case should be specified in court is not clear, and the specific requirements for appearing in court are not clear. No. 4. The reasons why the person in charge cannot appear in court are missing. The legal liability for failing to appear in court is vague. These are the legislative problems. For the implementation of the problems, including: 1, the overall court attendance rate is low and the regional differences are obvious 2, the administrative organ chief is difficult to appear in court, the executive power to the judicial power interference. On the basis of respecting the national conditions, our country should absorb the advanced experience of other countries and make up for the deficiency of the principal of the administrative organ appearing in court. In view of this, this article has provided the suggestion from the following several aspects: first, consummates the legislation. Make clear the main body of the chief administrative organ appearing in court, define the type of the case and the concrete requirement of appearing in court. In the absence of administrative organs in court, clear reasons and improve their accountability. Second, the implementation of the law concerning the appearance of responsible persons in court. In order to improve the jurisdiction of administrative litigation, the judicial power should be used to limit the administrative power, and at the same time, the court should be given the discretion to establish a mechanism for the court to adjudicate the case in court. Third, we should perfect the external safeguard mechanism for the chief of administrative organs to appear in court, strengthen their legal knowledge, and establish an open examination mechanism through training the heads of administrative organs. This paper uses text analysis method, comparative analysis method and case observation method to sort out and study the appearance of administrative officials in court. Under the background of the open and cooperative trial mode, the system of the principal of administrative organ appearing in court should become the means of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the administrative counterpart. The purpose of the research on the system of the chief of administrative organs appearing in court is to satisfy the reasonable demands of the administrative counterpart, to solve the administrative disputes substantively and to optimize the administrative trial environment.
【学位授予单位】：山西财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.3

【相似文献】