行政程序证据制度研究
发布时间：2018-10-21 07:49
【摘要】：行政程序证据制度是《行政程序法》中的重要制度,由于我国现阶段没有《行政程序法》,当然也没有在专门的法律文件中系统规定行政程序证据制度,行政程序证据规则只是散见于一些单行法律、法规。同时,行政机关在办理行政案件过程中,对于证据的收集、提供及采纳,更多是参照《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》、《最高人民法院关于执行中华人民共和国行政诉讼法若干问题的解释》、《最高人民法院关于行政诉讼证据若干问题的规定》。这使得行政程序中行政机关在证据的收集、提供、保存及采纳方面缺乏统一的法律支撑,并且行政程序参照司法解释的规定在法理上也说不通。况且,行政程序毕竟不是诉讼程序,两者在证据规则方面虽存在共同点,但是在诸多方面还是存在着差异。所以不能将诉讼证据规则全部直接用于行政程序。 本文旨在理清行政程序证据制度与行政诉讼证据制度之间的关系,明确行政程序证据制度的独立地位,建立行政法领域两种证据制度的和谐统一、平行不悖的机制。本文第一个部分为：行政程序证据制度概述,包括两节内容,第一节为证据与行政程序证据,第二节为行政程序证据制度的原则及价值追求；第二部分为：我国行政程序证据制度的现状,包括两节内容,第一节为我国关于行政程序证据制度的法律规定,第二节为我国行政程序证据制度与行政诉讼证据制度的现实关系；第三部分为：美国行政程序证据制度比较分析,包括两节内容,第一节为美国的行政程序证据概述,第二节为美国行政程序证据规则对我国行政程序证据制度的启示；第四部分为：我国行政程序证据制度相对独立模式探讨,包括三节内容,第一节为我国行政程序证据制度相对独立的必要性,第二节为我国行政程序证据制度相对独立的可能性,第三节为我国行政程序证据制度平行于行政诉讼证据制度。
[Abstract]:The evidence system of administrative procedure is an important system in the "Administrative procedure Law". Since there is no "Administrative procedure Law" in our country at the present stage, of course, there is no systematic regulation of the system of evidence of administrative procedure in special legal documents. The rules of evidence of administrative procedure are scattered in some separate laws and regulations. At the same time, in the course of handling administrative cases, the administrative organs shall collect, provide and adopt evidence, More reference is made to the Administrative Litigation Law of the people's Republic of China, the interpretation by the Supreme people's Court on some issues concerning the implementation of the Administrative procedure Law of the people's Republic of China, and the provisions of the Supreme people's Court on some issues concerning the evidence in Administrative Litigation. This makes the administrative organs in the collection, provision, preservation and adoption of evidence in the administrative procedures lack of unified legal support, and administrative procedures refer to the provisions of judicial interpretation in the legal theory is also unreasonable. Moreover, administrative procedure is not litigation procedure after all, although they have common ground in evidence rules, there are still differences in many aspects. Therefore, the rules of evidence can not be directly used in administrative procedures. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the relationship between the evidence system of administrative procedure and the system of evidence in administrative proceedings, to clarify the independent status of the system of evidence in administrative procedure, and to establish a mechanism of harmony and unity of the two systems of evidence in the field of administrative law. The first part of this paper is an overview of the evidence system of the administrative procedure, which includes two sections: the first section is the evidence and the evidence of the administrative procedure, the second section is the principle and value pursuit of the evidence system of the administrative procedure; The second part is divided into: our country administrative procedure evidence system present situation, including two sections content, the first section is our country regarding the administrative procedure evidence system law stipulation, The second section is the realistic relationship between the evidence system of administrative procedure in our country and the system of evidence in administrative proceedings; the third part is the comparative analysis of the evidence system of administrative procedure in the United States, including two sections, the first section is an overview of the evidence of administrative procedure in the United States. The second section is the enlightenment of American rules of evidence of administrative procedure to the system of evidence of administrative procedure in our country. The fourth part is about the relative independent mode of evidence system of administrative procedure in our country, which includes three sections. The first section is the necessity of the relative independence of the evidence system of the administrative procedure in our country, the second section is the possibility of the relatively independent system of the evidence system of the administrative procedure in our country, and the third section is that the evidence system of the administrative procedure of our country is parallel to the evidence system of the administrative procedure.
【学位授予单位】：甘肃政法学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.3
本文编号：2284436
[Abstract]:The evidence system of administrative procedure is an important system in the "Administrative procedure Law". Since there is no "Administrative procedure Law" in our country at the present stage, of course, there is no systematic regulation of the system of evidence of administrative procedure in special legal documents. The rules of evidence of administrative procedure are scattered in some separate laws and regulations. At the same time, in the course of handling administrative cases, the administrative organs shall collect, provide and adopt evidence, More reference is made to the Administrative Litigation Law of the people's Republic of China, the interpretation by the Supreme people's Court on some issues concerning the implementation of the Administrative procedure Law of the people's Republic of China, and the provisions of the Supreme people's Court on some issues concerning the evidence in Administrative Litigation. This makes the administrative organs in the collection, provision, preservation and adoption of evidence in the administrative procedures lack of unified legal support, and administrative procedures refer to the provisions of judicial interpretation in the legal theory is also unreasonable. Moreover, administrative procedure is not litigation procedure after all, although they have common ground in evidence rules, there are still differences in many aspects. Therefore, the rules of evidence can not be directly used in administrative procedures. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the relationship between the evidence system of administrative procedure and the system of evidence in administrative proceedings, to clarify the independent status of the system of evidence in administrative procedure, and to establish a mechanism of harmony and unity of the two systems of evidence in the field of administrative law. The first part of this paper is an overview of the evidence system of the administrative procedure, which includes two sections: the first section is the evidence and the evidence of the administrative procedure, the second section is the principle and value pursuit of the evidence system of the administrative procedure; The second part is divided into: our country administrative procedure evidence system present situation, including two sections content, the first section is our country regarding the administrative procedure evidence system law stipulation, The second section is the realistic relationship between the evidence system of administrative procedure in our country and the system of evidence in administrative proceedings; the third part is the comparative analysis of the evidence system of administrative procedure in the United States, including two sections, the first section is an overview of the evidence of administrative procedure in the United States. The second section is the enlightenment of American rules of evidence of administrative procedure to the system of evidence of administrative procedure in our country. The fourth part is about the relative independent mode of evidence system of administrative procedure in our country, which includes three sections. The first section is the necessity of the relative independence of the evidence system of the administrative procedure in our country, the second section is the possibility of the relatively independent system of the evidence system of the administrative procedure in our country, and the third section is that the evidence system of the administrative procedure of our country is parallel to the evidence system of the administrative procedure.
【学位授予单位】：甘肃政法学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.3
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前7条
1 王立;;论行政证据制度[J];晋中学院学报;2008年01期
2 蔡斌;;论我国行政证据制度立法的必要性及建构[J];吉林广播电视大学学报;2007年01期
3 张芳,张艳;论行政证据与行政诉讼证据的相异及衔接[J];黑龙江省政法管理干部学院学报;2004年05期
4 李牧;论行政证据的规制与保障功能[J];武汉理工大学学报(社会科学版);2003年03期
5 姬亚平;;论行政证据与行政诉讼证据关系之重构[J];行政法学研究;2008年04期
6 沈宏;论行政证据规则与诉讼证据规则多样化联系——兼论行政证据立法之必要性[J];行政与法(吉林省行政学院学报);2004年05期
7 苟吉芝;行政证据证明责任研究[J];中州学刊;2005年05期
，本文编号：2284436
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2284436.html
