检视开发区管理机构的法律性质——基于规范分析的视角

发布时间：2018-03-09 23:39

本文选题：开发区管理机构　切入点：人民政府　出处：《中南大学学报(社会科学版)》2017年04期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：作为地方行政组织,开发区管理机构的法律性质不甚明晰,将其认定为人民政府的"派出机构"抑或"派出机关"均具有一定的规范依据。然而,第一种定性在现实中将面对复杂的法律问题,如作出具体和抽象行政行为的主体资格问题;第二种定性则会遭遇明显的规范困境,它不仅背离了《地方组织法》对于派出机关的设置,而且不符合《宪法》有关行政区划的设计。应对这一两难之境的进路有三:其一是限定和控制开发区管理机构的行政权力,使其基本符合"派出机构"的定性;其二是修改《宪法》和法律,将其界定为一类新型的"派出机关";其三是逐渐取消开发区管理机构的建制,代之以县级、乡级人民政府或者街道办事处。相比之下,第三条进路最为理想。
[Abstract]:As a local administrative organization, the legal nature of the administrative organ of the development zone is not very clear, and it has certain normative basis to regard it as the "dispatched office" or "the dispatched organ" of the people's government. The first kind of characterization will face complex legal problems in reality, such as the subject qualification problem of making concrete and abstract administrative act; the second kind of characterization will encounter obvious normative dilemma. It not only deviates from the setting up of the local organic law for the local authorities, but also does not conform to the design of the administrative divisions in accordance with the Constitution. There are three ways to deal with this dilemma: one is to limit and control the administrative power of the administrative organs of the development zones. It is basically in line with the characterization of "dispatched offices"; the second is to amend the Constitution and laws to define it as a new type of "dispatched office"; and the third is to gradually abolish the establishment of the administrative bodies of the development zones and replace it with the county level. Township people's government or street office. In contrast, the third route is the most ideal.
【作者单位】：四川大学法学院;
【基金】：民政部2016年度民政政策理论研究委托课题“开发区转行政区的法律机制研究”(2016MZRL010610)
【分类号】：D922.1

【参考文献】