我国行政听证制度的优化

发布时间：2018-03-18 21:15

本文选题：行政程序　切入点：行政听证　出处：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：作为现代行政程序法的核心制度，行政听证制度起源于司法领域，其核心精神是“听取对方的意见”，即在作出不利于一方的决定时，应该给予对方充分的陈述、质证、辩护的机会。行政听证制度将对行政权的监督扩展至行政过程中，很好地应对了二战以后，因行政权极度膨胀而造成的立法权、司法权对其制约不足的局面，行政听证制度已成为现代法治国家行政法治的重要标志。我国一直致力于法治建设，行政听证制度的优化自然应为题中之义。最早设立于《行政处罚法》中的听证制度，虽是意义重大的开启，但制度粗略，缺乏可操作性。跟进的其他法律对其也未进行实质性的发展。在核心制度发展受阻的情形下，被学界呼吁多年的统一行政程序法也迟迟未能出台。在当今政府职能由管理型向服务型转变的关键时期，行政程序法对于行政权规范和控制的无可替代的作用已成共识。尤其是在执政党近期提出“把权力关进笼子里”的关口，行政程序法的出台更显得紧迫和必要。在这一大背景下，对其核心制度——行政听证制度做梳理和讨论具有重要的现实意义。本文的核心内容是，对我国现行的行政听证制度进行分析和梳理，指出其制度设计和运行过程中存在的问题，，同时也对产生问题的深层次的原因进行阐释，最后在国家层面制定统一行政程序法的背景下，提出对行政听证制度优化的对策。本文共四章，第一章的主要内容是：首先，对行政听证概念及其发展的脉络进行了梳理，然后再此基础上对行政听证的概念做出新的界定。其次，对行政听证制度的法理基础做概括性的阐述，包括英国的自然公正原则、美国的正当法律程序原则、德国的法治理论与人类尊严说以及我国的人民民主原则。最后论述了行政听证的特征和其遵守的基本原则，特征包括准司法性和职权性，基本原则是指公正原则和公开原则。第二章主要是对现行行政听证制度的立法和实践状况进行分析，以勾勒出我国行政听制度的发展现状。对制度分析时，选取了《行政处罚法》、《行政许可法》、《立法法》、《治安管理处罚法》和《价格法》五个对象。进行实证分析时，选取了行政程序法先试先行的湖南省株洲市的案例作为样本，试图反应出我国行政听证发展的前沿水平。第三章是对现行听证制度的缺陷和不足进行呈现，并对不完善的原因进行了揭示，该章中笔者用了大量的笔墨对地方行政程序立法中的听证制度进行了分析、总结，以便为国家层面的制度设计提供借鉴。第四章是在制定统一行政程序法的大背景下提出的对行政听证制度进行优化的方案，主要从听证的范围以及听证主持人、案卷排他、听证代表遴选，监督救济几方面展开。
[Abstract]:As the core system of the modern administrative procedure law, the administrative hearing system originates from the judicial field. Its core spirit is to "listen to the opinions of the other party", that is, when making a decision against one party, it should give the other party adequate statements and cross-examination. The opportunity to defend. The administrative hearing system extends the supervision of the executive power to the administrative process, which has dealt well with the situation that the legislative power caused by the extreme expansion of the executive power after the second world war and the insufficient restriction of the judicial power on it. Administrative hearing system has become an important symbol of the rule of law in a modern country ruled by law. China has been committed to the construction of the rule of law, the optimization of the administrative hearing system should naturally be the meaning of the topic. The hearing system, which was first set up in the Administrative punishment Law, is a significant opening, but the system is rough. Lack of maneuverability. Other laws followed did not substantially develop them. In cases where the development of the core system is blocked, The unified administrative procedure law, which has been called upon by academic circles for many years, has not been promulgated. In the key period of the transition of government function from management to service, The irreplaceable role of the Administrative procedure Law in the regulation and control of administrative power has reached a consensus. In particular, the ruling party recently put forward the point of "putting power in a cage." The introduction of administrative procedure law is more urgent and necessary. Under this background, it is of great practical significance to sort out and discuss its core system-administrative hearing system. The core content of this paper is to analyze and comb the current administrative hearing system of our country, to point out the problems existing in the design and operation of the system, and to explain the deep-seated causes of the problems. Finally, under the background of establishing the unified administrative procedure law at the national level, the countermeasures to optimize the administrative hearing system are put forward. The main contents of the first chapter are as follows: firstly, the concept of administrative hearing and its development are combed, then on this basis, the concept of administrative hearing is defined. A general description of the legal basis of the administrative hearing system, including the principle of natural justice in Britain, the principle of due process in the United States and the principle of due process of law in the United States, The theory of rule of law and the theory of human dignity in Germany and the principle of people's democracy in our country. Finally, it discusses the characteristics of administrative hearing and its basic principles, including quasi-judicial and power. The second chapter mainly analyzes the legislation and practice of the current administrative hearing system, in order to outline the current situation of the development of the administrative hearing system in China. This paper selects five objects, the Administrative punishment Law, the Administrative license Law, the Legislative Law, the Public Security Administration punishment Law and the Price Law. In the course of empirical analysis, the case of Zhuzhou City, Hunan Province, where the administrative procedure law is first tried, is selected as the sample. The third chapter presents the defects and deficiencies of the current hearing system, and reveals the reasons for the imperfection. In this chapter, the author used a lot of pen and ink to analyze the hearing system in the local administrative procedure legislation. In order to provide a reference for the design of the system at the national level. Chapter 4th is a scheme to optimize the administrative hearing system under the background of the formulation of a unified administrative procedure law, mainly from the scope of the hearing and the hearing moderator, the case file exclusive. The hearing representative selects, supervises the relief several aspects to launch.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.1

【相似文献】