问责权法治化研究

发布时间：2018-06-05 14:20

本文选题：问责权 + 法治化　；参考：《苏州大学》2010年博士论文

【摘要】： 公共权力可以分为政府管理权和“追究”政府管理权否定性责任的问责权。政府管理权(下称管理权)的否定性责任,又称为管理权因为没有正确履行第一性义务而应该承担的第二性义务,即管理权因为没有履行好“分内之事”而应该承担的相应“不利后果”。管理权应该法治化,否则,人民的消极社会权利得不到很好维护,积极社会权利得不到很好发展。管理权的法治化离不开问责权的催动。因为问责权的“分内之事”(即第一性义务)是指,当管理权滥用职权时,问责权应该根据法律迫使管理权承担相应的“不利后果”。显然,只有问责权依法履行自己的第一性义务,管理权才能得到持续的、有效的、牢靠的控制。事实上,问责权依法履行自己的第一性义务,即追究管理权滥用职权的“不利后果”,也意味着管理权的“分内之事”同时被明确。否则,问责权就无法裁判管理权是否履行好自己的职守。而管理权“分内之事”的被明确,又进一步意味着人民私权利得到制度化认可与保障。因此,问责权对整个社会走向法治化都具有不可忽略的重要性。然而,问责权也不是天使,它也有可能不正确履行自己的第一性义务。也就是说,问责权可能不作为导致管理权滥用成灾,或者错误作为导致管理权战战兢兢、怀有抱怨。因之,为问责权设置第二性义务便显得十分重要。问责权的第二性义务是指,当问责权滥用职权时,即没有依法追究管理权的否定性责任时,它也应该依法被追究相应的否定性责任、即依法承担相应的“不利后果”。也就是说,问责权也应该被“问责”。问责权被“问责”只能理解为问责权相互交叉问责,建立了一个问责权网状交叉问责循环系统。因为,单线条式的问责体系使得最后(也是最高的)一个问责权永远不受刚性制约。问责权网状交叉问责循环系统不仅使得问责权法治化(相互制约)有了本体论根据,而且,它使得问责权由此成为一个国家权力系统中的动力核心或说总枢纽。问责权法治化获得了价值论根据。也就是说,如果上述网状循环系统获得构建,问责权法治化就得到了保证,进而管理权法治化也就获得了恒久动力。换言之,问责权法治化某种程度上是自在自为的,而管理权法治化是需要问责权法治化来推动的。因此,抓住了问责权法治化,特别是抓住了建立问责权网状交叉问责循环系统,也就抓住了建设法治社会的根本。反过来也成立,一个社会法治化的破碎也必然从这个网状交叉问责循环系统的破碎开始。网状交叉问责循环系统的建立还意味着民主社会的到来。因为人民问责权是问责权中极为重要的一极,只有人民问责权活跃起来,网状循环系统才会生生不息的运行下去。相反,人民问责权的式微往往宣告了这个循环系统的破产。结果,政府内部的党政问责权(即同体问责权)作为尚方宝剑一枝独大,它马上就暴露出权力的固有缺陷。许多时候,它会和管理权同流合污,管理权失去了控制便如出笼猛虎肆意伤害人民。少些时候,它可能在民本思想和道德感的驱使下剑指政府管理权滥用,造福人民;但这种情况于人民来说可遇不可求。有鉴于此,本文对问责权法治化进行研究。从整体上而言,这种研究分为两个部分:一是,对问责权法治化展开规范研究,即在解读法治主义范式基础上,描述问责权法治化的理想模式(以当代中国为背景)。这里的“化”当理解为“实现了的状态”。二是,对当代中国的问责权法治化展开实践研究,即在问责权法治化理想模式的基础上,挖掘当代中国问责权法治化的多维梗阻,并积极探寻排除这些梗阻的现实路径。这里的“化”当理解为“努力推进、积极演化”。具体来说,本文按照前后承接的关系一共分为六个部分: 导论。主要探讨研究问责权法治化的理据。第一章:法治主义范式的当代理解。主要从“良法治理”和“普遍守法”两个层面对法治主义范式的当代内涵予以解读。“良法治理”意味着通过完备的法制,尊重和保护私权利、规制公共权力。私权利包括消极社会权利和积极社会权利,对二者予以恰当的制度安排十分重要。在现代民主社会,本体论意义上的公共权力主要包括抽象人民主权与具体人民主权,对二者分别予以有效规制也十分重要。“普遍守法”意味着私权利和公共权力都遵守“良法”规定。它包括内在守法与外在守法。外在守法相对于内在守法,意义更为深远。第二章:问责权法治化的理想模式。主要运用法治主义范式锻造问责权。它从问责权的法治化规定和法治化制约两个层面展开分析。问责权的法治化规定是指明晰问责权的“分内之事”和“分内权能”。“分内之事”是指问责权的“职守”,“分内权能”是指问责权的“职权”,只有二者清晰明了,问责权的行使才会有规有矩。问责权的法治化制约是指运用外在的、内在的控制,使得问责权严守职守,不敢越雷池半步。显然,问责权的法治化规定主要与“良法治理”相联系;问责权的法治化制约与“普遍守法”相联系。问责权法治化的理想模式蕴含着形式要件、精神要件和实质要件。第三章:问责权法治化的多维梗阻。主要基于问责权的规定和制约两个层面分析当代中国问责权走向法治化的多维困阻。首先,当代中国存在问责权“规定性”不足的缺陷。一方面,各种问责权呈现“职守”模糊情形;另一方面,与人民问责权、代议机关问责权“职权”匮乏相对应,党政机关问责权表现出“职权”过剩现象。其次,当代中国存在问责权“制约性”缺失的缺陷。一是,由于缺乏公民精神,人民问责权内在制约性不足;二是,由于人民问责权的“职权匮乏”,使得代议机关问责权缺乏外在制约;三是,由于人民问责权和代议机关问责权的“职权匮乏”,使得党政机关问责权也缺乏外在制约性;四是,由于缺乏内在守法精神,代议机关问责权、党政机关问责权的内在制约性不足。在这些问题当中,最重要的是因为人民问责权和代议机关问责权的“职权匮乏”,导致属于外在制约方面的问责权网状交叉问责循环系统没有建立起来。相应的,可以用问责权法治化形式要件的不足、精神要件的脱离、实质要件的匮乏来对当代中国问责权法治化的多维梗阻做一总体评价。第四章:建构问责权网状交叉问责循环系统的路径。主要从政治、经济、文化三个层面探寻建立该系统的现实途径。首先,完善人民代表大会制度是建立上述问责循环系统的关键。完善人民代表大会制度的基本方向是实现镜像论代议制与委托代理论代议制的有机统一。其次,发展社会主义市场经济是建立上述循环系统的基础。经济基础决定政治上层建筑,人民问责权只能建立在“政治解放”基础上,而后者则只能建立在市场经济和市民社会充分发展基础上。因为,市民社会的发达使得契约治理社会取代身份治理社会,使得权利本位取代义务本位,使得抽象人民主权最终只能与消极社会权利相结合,具体人民主权与积极社会权利相结合。再次,发展规则性文化是建立上述问责循环系统的核心。文化作为思想上层建筑,对政治上层建筑的发展起到深刻影响作用。具体说来,发展健康的规则性文化,有助于现代公民精神(主体意识和公共意识的统一)的培育,有助于人民问责权的强盛,从而有助于问责权网状交叉问责循环系统的建立。结论:主要概括出本文的基本结论,并提出进一步思考的方向。
[Abstract]:The public power can be divided into the right of government management and the right to investigate the negative responsibility of the government management right . The negative responsibility of the government management right ( hereinafter referred to as the management right ) is also called the administrative right because the second obligation which should be borne because the first obligation is not performed correctly , that is , the management right is the corresponding " adverse consequences " that should be borne by the failure to carry out the internal affairs .

The administrative right should be ruled by law , otherwise , the negative social rights of the people are not well maintained , and the positive social rights are not very good .

It is clear that the right to accountability can be continuously , effectively and firmly controlled . In fact , accountability cannot judge the " adverse consequences " of the power of management . Otherwise , the right to accountability cannot judge whether the administrative authority performs its own duty . Otherwise , the right to accountability cannot judge whether the right of management has been institutionalized and guaranteed . Therefore , the right to accountability has an unnegligible importance for the whole society towards the rule of law .

However , the right to accountability is not an angel , and it may not fulfil its first obligation correctly . That is , accountability may not act as a result of an abuse of the right to management , or a mistake as a fear of managing the right to management , with complaints .

As a result , it is very important to set up a second obligation for the right of accountability . When asking for abuse of authority , that is , when there is no negative responsibility for the management right according to law , it should also be held accountable for the corresponding negative consequences according to law . In other words , the accountability right should also be " accountable . " In other words , the accountability system should be understood as a cross - accountability system of accountability . Because the single - line accountability system makes the final ( and highest ) accountability system never subject to rigid constraints .

In other words , if the above - mentioned reticulated circulation system is constructed , the rule of accountability is guaranteed , and then the rule of authority is guaranteed . In other words , the rule of accountability is based on the need of accountability . In other words , the rule of accountability is based on the need of accountability . In other words , it also holds the foundation of building the rule of law society . In turn , the fragmentation of a social law must start from the crushing of this network cross - accountability system .

The establishment of the network cross - accountability circulatory system also means the arrival of a democratic society . Because the people ask the right to be an extremely important one in the right of accountability , only the people ask the right to be active , the net circulatory system will survive . On the contrary , the government ' s internal party and government accountability ( i.e . , the same body accountability ) will expose the inherent weakness of the power . As a result , the government ' s internal party and government accountability ( i.e . , the same body accountability ) will expose the inherent weakness of the power . As a result , it may have lost control over the people ' s power . As a result , it may abuse the power of the government under the drive of the people ' s thought and moral sense , and benefit the people ; however , this situation may not be available to the people .

On the whole , this research is divided into two parts : Firstly , it is divided into two parts : one is the norm study on the legalization of accountability right , which is based on the interpretation of the rule of law , and describes the multi - dimensional obstruction of the legalization of accountability right in contemporary China , and actively explores the realistic path to eliminate these obstruction .

In particular , this article is divided into six parts according to the relationship between the following :

In this paper , the author mainly discusses the theory of the legalization of accountability right .

Chapter 1 : The contemporary understanding of the paradigm of rule of law . It is important to interpret the contemporary connotation of the rule of law paradigm from the two aspects of " good law governance " and " universal law " . " Good law governance " means that it is important to adopt complete rule of law , respect and protect private rights and regulate public power . In modern democratic society , public power in the sense of ontology mainly includes the abstract people ' s sovereignty and the specific people ' s sovereignty , and it is very important to regulate them .

Chapter 2 : The ideal model for the legalization of the right of accountability . It mainly applies the rule of law doctrine to forge the right of accountability . It refers to the " duty of responsibility " and " internal power " of the right of accountability .

On the other hand , because of the lack of citizen ' s spirit and the lack of power of accountability , the system of accountability is not limited .

Chapter Four : The path of constructing a network cross - accountability system of accountability is established . First , to perfect the system of people ' s congresses is the key to the establishment of the system . First , to perfect the system of people ' s congresses is the key to the establishment of the above - mentioned system . Secondly , the development of socialist market economy is the core of the establishment of the above - mentioned system .

Conclusion : The main conclusions of this paper are summarized , and the direction of further consideration is put forward .
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D912.1

【相似文献】