南京国民政府时期甘肃民众控告县长研究

发布时间：2018-05-30 17:24

本文选题：南京国民政府 + 甘肃　；参考：《西北师范大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：民告官,古已有之。但是迄今为止,尚未有一篇学位论文对南京国民政府时期甘肃民众控告县长这一问题进行专题研究,这表明民告官问题的研究还有较大余地。本文以南京国民政府时期甘肃县级政权状况为切入点,以民众控告县长为总领,在揭示民告官制度实质的同时,深入探讨该时期基层政权实况。南京国民政府成立后,继承并完善了肇始于民国初期,发展于北洋政府时期的《行政诉讼制度》,我国近代行政诉讼制度得以确立,民告官之途径呈现出多样化特点。二十世纪三十年代初期,国民政府为澄清吏治,缓和官民之间的矛盾,颁布了《民众控告官吏递呈办法》这一法规,因为民众对其易知易行,成为控告官吏的主要途径之一。依据这一办法,作为上级机关的省政府,一方面可以通过民众控告县长案件之呈文了解县级政权的概况,另一方面通过对民众控告县长案件的公正处置可以实现民众之认同,进而树立政府威信,可谓一举两得。但是,由于特殊的国情和政情,致使正常的民告官机制难以形成。南京国民政府时期,县长作为地方基层政权中的重要一环,直接担负着将政府政令实施并付诸实践的功用。甘肃僻处西北一隅,由于其地理和政情的特殊性,县长处境十分尴尬,地方事务推进维艰,县级政权遂变得虚弱、乏力,呈现出“内卷化”特点。在政府支持甚至鼓励民告官的背景下,出现了众多民众控告官员的案件,作为主持一县之政的县长,自然首当其冲。然而,理想与现实的偏差,民告官之实际收效与政府之期望相差甚远,其原因为:第一,县长作为民众控告之主体,客观上由于受到多重因素的桎梏,举步维艰。此种背景下,省政府一方面对民众控告县长案件的处置大都持避重就轻的态度,另一方面对诬告县长之民众亦未严格按照“反坐切结”办法执行,如此,不仅民众权益未得到维护、县长威信亦受影响,而且县级政权之腐败状况亦未得以改善,致使政府公信力逐渐下降。究其缘由是因为其根本目的是为了缓解官民双方心理上的不平衡,仅仅是给民众提供一个发泄申诉的渠道,而不是真正为了惩治贪污腐败者,民告官其实质为“民督官”。第二,从当时国家政权面临的状况而言,国民政府受到多重势力的挑战,外有日本之侵略,内有各派势力之勾心斗角,在外患内乱的困境中,国民政府将其重心放在军事建设层面,而对政治建设较为忽视,使其不能倾全力施行民告官制度,致使民告官的各种法律、法规流于形式,民告官未收到实效自在意料之中。
[Abstract]:The people have sued the officials in ancient times. But up to now, there is not a dissertation to study the problem of people suing the county magistrate in the period of Nanjing National Government, which indicates that there is still much room for studying the problem of civil prosecution. Based on the situation of the county government in Gansu during the period of Nanjing National Government, this paper, taking the populace suing the county chief as the general guide, reveals the essence of the civil prosecution system, and probes into the actual situation of the grass-roots regime in that period. After the establishment of the Nanjing National Government, it inherited and perfected the Administrative Litigation system, which originated in the early period of the Republic of China and developed in the period of Beiyang Government. In the early 1930s, in order to clarify the administration of officials and ease the contradiction between the officials and the people, the National Government promulgated the Law of Public Complaints against officials, which became one of the main ways to sue officials. According to this method, the provincial government, as a higher authority, can, on the one hand, understand the general situation of the county power through the public complaint against the county governor's case, and on the other hand, it can realize the people's approval by handling the case of the populace against the county chief fairly. Then establish the authority of the government, can be said to kill two birds with one stone. However, due to the special national conditions and political conditions, it is difficult to form the normal mechanism of public prosecution. During the period of Nanjing National Government, the county magistrate, as an important part of the local grass-roots government, directly assumed the function of carrying out the government decree and putting it into practice. Gansu Province is located in a corner of the northwest, because of its special geography and political situation, the county chief is in a very awkward situation, and the local affairs are difficult to advance, so the county government becomes weak and weak, showing the characteristics of "internal curl". In the context of government support and even encouragement, there have been many cases of people suing officials. As the county chief presiding over a county, it is natural to bear the brunt. However, the deviation between ideal and reality, the actual effect of public prosecution and the expectation of the government are far from each other. The reasons are as follows: first, the county chief, as the subject of public accusation, is objectively bound by many factors. Against this background, the provincial government, on the one hand, takes an evasive attitude towards the handling of the case of the populace against the county chief, on the other hand, it does not strictly abide by the "sit down and knot" method for the people who falsely accuse the county chief. Not only the rights and interests of the people have not been safeguarded, but also the prestige of the county governor has been affected, and the corruption of the county power has not been improved, which has led to the gradual decline of the credibility of the government. The reason is that its fundamental purpose is to alleviate the psychological imbalance between the officials and the people, and to provide a channel for the public to vent their complaints, rather than to punish the corrupt people, and the civil prosecution is essentially "the governor of the people". Second, in terms of the situation faced by the state power at that time, the national government was challenged by many forces, including the aggression of Japan and the collusion of various forces, in the predicament of civil strife abroad. The National Government focuses on military construction, but neglects the political construction, which makes it unable to carry out the system of civil prosecution. As a result, all kinds of laws and regulations of civil prosecution are mere formality, and it is not to be expected that the official of civil prosecution has not received actual results.
【学位授予单位】：西北师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：K262.9

【参考文献】