我国高校信息公开范围的完善

发布时间：2018-04-16 21:20

本文选题：高校信息 + 政府信息　；参考：《上海师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：高校信息公开范围是高校信息公开制度的核心内容,其主要作用在于明确高校公开什么信息和不公开什么信息。然而现行立法规范对范围界定模糊,不能满足公众知情权对高校信息公开的要求。在高校信息公开行政诉讼中,对高校信息公开范围的认定主要依据《政府信息公开条例》,而高校开展办学活动和提供社会服务不同于政府活动,高校信息具有不同于政府信息的特殊性,所以不能把高校信息公开范围完全等同于政府信息公开范围来认定。司法实践中,把高校信息作为政府信息来认定,是对高校信息公开范围亟待完善形成的一种倒逼。因此,本文将在利益权衡的基础上作出价值判断,完善我国的高校信息公开范围,从而最大程度满足公众知情权对高校信息公开的要求。本文第一部分是理论铺垫,主要从核心概念界定、理论基础和公开范围影响因素分析三个方面展开。分析高校信息是研究公开范围的前提,鉴于《高等学校信息公开办法》已对高校信息作出规定,笔者认为立法的界定更具有权威性,故应当从立法的规定出发对高校信息的含义进行解读。在约束主体上,无论公立高校还是民办高校都应受到《办法》的约束;在信息来源上,高校信息是一切与高校事务的管理和执行相关的信息。高校信息复杂多样,结合含义可以分析出它具有公共性、依附性和现实性等特点。在高校信息公开活动中,公民的知情权实质是高校利益相关者对高校信息的需求,同时高校也普遍存在信息不对称,这两者都要求高校进行信息公开。而公开范围的影响因子主要有高校自主权的程度、高校信息公开范围立法的完备性和高校信息公开的实践深度,分析这些变量因子如何影响范围,可以实现范围完善时的事半功倍。本文第二部分和第三部分是现状分析,主要从立法现状和司法实践现状两方面展开。高校信息公开范围的立法规范主要有《政府信息公开条例》、《高等学校信息公开办法》和《高等学校信息公开事项清单》,它们确立了高校信息的主动公开范围、依申请公开范围和不予公开范围。通过对这些立法规范之间的比较分析,发现我国高校信息公开范围在立法上的混合式立法技术和没有明确信息主动公开原则等问题导致高校信息不能实现最大化公开。而立法的不足必然会影响司法实践中高校信息公开范围的认定,为司法实践带来一些障碍,导致了司法在应对高校信息公开申请时独立性不足,对是否公开信息持保守态度。当然司法还是具有一定能动性的,部分法院在裁判中确立了值得注意和警惕的司法裁判规则和法律适用问题,主要有高校信息区别对待、依申请公开区分处理和三需要的认定,通过提炼这些规则的适用,希望为完善我国高校信息公开行政诉讼制度贡献一份力量。第四部分是公开范围的完善建议。在立法视角下,以法律形式明确高校信息公开制度、制定高校信息公开工作条例和明确推定公开原则这三个方面,是从宏观角度出发,来完善对范围的立法规定,以求建立协调一致的高校信息公开范围法律规范体系。继而从微观层面出发,分别就不予公开的范围、主动公开的范围和依申请公开的范围提出具体的修改和完善建议。在实践视角下,完善公开范围需要明确公开高校信息的优先级和提倡建立高校、行政和司法对信息公开的联动应对机制,以实现有限资源内高校信息公开的最大化。
[Abstract]:The scope of information publicity in universities is the core content of the information disclosure system, its main function is to clear the public what information and what information is not open. However the current legislation on the definition of fuzzy scope, can not meet the public's right to know of university information disclosure requirements in the information publicity in universities in the administrative litigation, the scope of the disclosure of university information identification according to "the regulation on disclosure of government information, and colleges and universities to carry out educational activities and provide social services is different from the government, university information is different from the government information, so the information disclosure is not completely equal to the scope of government information disclosure of the judicial practice, the university information as government information to identify. Is a kind of forced on university information disclosure to improve the range of formation. Therefore, this paper will make a value based on the balance of interests. To improve the judgment, the scope of information disclosure in our country, to the maximum extent to meet the public's right to know of the information disclosure requirements. The first part is the theoretical basis, mainly from the definition of core concepts, theoretical basis and scope of the public factors analysis of three aspects. The analysis is a prerequisite to the study of university information disclosed, in view of < measures of university information disclosure > has made provisions of the university information, the author thinks that the definition of more authoritative legislation, it should be from the legislative provisions of the interpretation of the meaning of the information. The constraint on the subject, whether public universities or private universities should be "measures on the constraints on information source, colleges and universities; the information is all colleges and universities affairs management and implementation of relevant information. The information is complicated, with the meaning of it can be analyzed with the public, dependence and reality etc. In university information disclosure activities, the citizen's right to know is the essence of University stakeholders' demand for university information, at the same time universities also exist information asymmetry, both of which require university information disclosure. And the main factor influence scope of the public degree of autonomy of colleges and universities, University Information Disclosure legislation completeness and scope university information disclosure practice depth analysis of how these factors influence scope, can realize the perfect range multiplier. In the second part and the third part is the analysis of the present situation, mainly from two aspects of legislation and judicial practice the status quo. Legislation scope of university information disclosure of government information disclosure regulations < >, < > way university information disclosure and "university information disclosure list >, they established the university information voluntarily disclosed, in accordance with the application open range And not disclosed. Through the comparison of these laws and regulations, the scope of the public university information found in the legislation of the mixed legislative technology and no clear public information initiative principle questions lead to university information not to maximize the public. That the legislation is not enough will affect the judicial practice in the scope of public information and bring some obstacles for judicial practice, leading to the judicial application in dealing with public university information when lack of independence, hold a conservative attitude on whether public information. Of course still has certain judicial activism, some courts established worthy of attention and vigilance on judicial rules and the applicable law of the referee, the main university information the distinction, in accordance with the application of public identification processing and three needs, through the application of refining these rules, hope to improve the Chinese interest With a power system of public administrative litigation. The fourth part is the scope of the public suggestions. In the view of legislation, in the form of law is clear about the information disclosure system, formulation of university information disclosure regulations and the principle of presumption of clear public these three aspects, is from a macro perspective, to improve the legislation of the scope, in order to establish the scope of information disclosure coordinated legal system. Then from the microscopic perspective, are not open, put forward specific proposals and modify the scope of active public and in accordance with the application of the scope of the public. In practice from the perspective of improving the public universities need to establish a range of clear public university information priority and advocate, administrative the linkage of the response mechanism and judicial information disclosure, in order to maximize the limited resources within the university information disclosure.

【学位授予单位】：上海师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.1

【参考文献】