组织性法律保留探究

发布时间：2018-07-05 03:32

本文选题：社会系统理论 + 组织性法律保留　；参考：《上海师范大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国自改革开放以来,中央政府经历了七次大规模的机构改革,行政组织逐渐趋于精简化和弹性化。在这一过程中,组织法并没有发挥积极的作用,也没有对行政组织的调整作出任何回应。但学界对组织法制的研究仍停留在对“职权法定”、“组织法定”反复的政策呼吁和盲目的立法建议上。鉴于此,本文围绕我国中央行政组织是否需要适用法律保留、行政组织领域法律保留的适用范围以及相应的规范密度如何确定这三个核心问题,对组织性法律保留原则进行深入研究,试图构建一个明确的组织权限分配的制度框架。本文首先以卢曼的功能分化的社会系统理论作为分析工具,讨论了法律与行政作为两个功能上独立的社会次级系统在共同指向行政组织时所形成的一种结构上封闭但认知上互相开放的关系。组织性法律保留原则作为法律系统内的一种反思机制,观察着立法是否怠于行使其组织权或者过度介入行政的自主决定空间。因此,适用组织性法律保留原则对于在行政组织领域界分法律与行政的调控范围有着重要意义。由于组织性法律保留原则的发展并不同步于以人权保障为核心的法律保留原则,所以很难完全采用后者的适用范围标准。本文提出,组织性法律保留原则的适用范围标准应包括以保障基本权利的客观实现为核心的重要性理论、民主正当性原则和功能结构取向的判断标准三个要素。基于该适用范围标准以及对域外中央行政组织法律保留范围的经验借鉴,本文认为我国中央行政组织的法律保留范围应至少到直属机构一级,即国务院、部委和直属机构需要明确法律保留的规定。在确定法律保留的适用范围之后,随之而来的是规范密度问题。规范密度包括两个层次:一是层级化法律保留体系,二是广义的法律明确性原则。域外规范密度共有三种基本模式:随着组织层级的递增规范密度逐渐递减的德国模式、规范密度始终维持在同一水平的日本经典模式和随着组织层级递增规范密度也同步递增的台湾改革模式。基于对我国行政管理体制以及组织法制现状的考察,本文认为目前采用组织层级越高,规范密度越大的台湾改革模式更加适合中国国情。
[Abstract]:Since the reform and opening to the outside world, the central government has experienced seven large-scale institutional reforms, and the administrative organizations tend to be streamlined and flexible. In this process, the organic law does not play an active role, nor does it respond to any changes in the administrative organization. However, the academic research on the legal system of organization is still focused on the repeated policy appeals and blind legislative suggestions on "statutory functions and powers" and "statutory organizational laws". In view of this, this article revolves around whether the central administrative organization of our country should apply the law reservation, how to determine the applicable scope of the law reservation in the administrative organization field and how to determine the corresponding normative density. This paper makes an in-depth study on the principle of organizational legal reservation and tries to construct a clear institutional framework for the allocation of organizational jurisdiction. First of all, this paper uses Luhmann's theory of social system of functional differentiation as an analytical tool. This paper discusses the relationship between law and administration as two functionally independent social sub-systems which are structurally closed but cognitively open to administrative organizations. As a reflection mechanism in the legal system, the principle of organizational legal reservation observes whether the legislation is lazy to exercise its organizational right or to intervene in the independent decision space of administration. Therefore, the application of the principle of organizational legal reservation is of great significance to the division of law and the scope of administrative regulation in the field of administrative organization. Since the development of the principle of organizational legal reservation does not synchronize with the principle of legal reservation with human rights as the core, it is difficult to adopt the standard of the scope of application of the latter completely. This paper puts forward that the criterion of the scope of application of the principle of organizational legal reservation should include three elements: the theory of importance, the principle of democratic legitimacy and the criterion of judging the orientation of functional structure, which take the objective realization of basic rights as the core. Based on the criteria of the scope of application and the experience of the legal reservation of the extraterritorial central administrative organization, this paper holds that the scope of the legal reservation of the central administrative organization of our country should be at least to the level of the directly subordinate organization, that is, the State Council. Ministries and immediate agencies need to clarify the provisions reserved by the law. After determining the scope of application of legal reservations, the problem of normative density follows. The normative density includes two levels: one is the hierarchical legal reservation system, the other is the generalized principle of legal clarity. There are three basic patterns of extraterritorial normative density: the German model of decreasing normative density at the organizational level, The canonical density is always maintained at the same level in the Japanese classical model and the Taiwan reform model in which the normative density increases simultaneously with the increase of the organizational level. Based on the investigation of the present situation of the administrative system and the organizational legal system in China, this paper holds that the higher the organizational level and the greater the normative density, the more suitable the Taiwan reform model is for China's national conditions.
【学位授予单位】：上海师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.1

【参考文献】