行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查研究
发布时间：2018-08-01 17:56
【摘要】：2014年11月1日,新《行政诉讼法》颁行,其第53条赋予了行政相对人在提起行政诉讼时可一并请求法院对被诉行政行为所依据之规范性文件进行审查的权利,其第64条规定了法院对于规范性文件审查结果的处理方法。从而确立了行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查制度。本文第一章主要介绍了规范性文件的含义和相关问题,并对这样一项制度的理论基础和现实必要性做了分析并对其与其他相关概念制度的异同和关系作出比较。本文第二章主要是对新行政诉讼法对行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查的相关规定颁行后,其之于新法颁行前类似相关规定的进步意义和新法颁行后该制度所存在的主要问题的分析。在新法颁行以前,我国对于行政诉讼中规范性文件的司法审查早有相关规定,主要来自于最高人民法院的司法解释和会谈纪要等自定性规则,这些规定通过"自我赋权"的方式赋予了法院对行政诉讼中规范性文件进行审查的"隐性权力"。新法的颁行对这种"隐性权力"以明确化和正当化,并扩充了其中的内容,具有很大的进步意义。但就新法实施状况而言,其在颁行之后实效性并不理想,存在着制度构建极不完善和一些规定不合理等问题。本文第三章主要是是对域外一些主要国家（地区）的抽象行政行为司法审查进行比较研究,对于行政规范性文件的附带审查,先进国家地区虽然没有完全相同的事物,但在抽象行政行为司法审查方面有着很成熟的制度成果,对于我国行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查的制度构建有着积极的借鉴意义。本文最后一章主要是从制度层面对新《行政诉讼法》所对定的行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查进行构建,虽然导致行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查实效性不理想的原因是多方面的,但从法规范学和法解释学对现有规定进行补充和修正,在当下无疑具有立竿见影的效果,因此,在国内外已有理论成果和制度的基础上,从审查程序、标准、方式和审查结果处理等方面对我国行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查的制度构建,使这样一项制度在行政诉讼实践中具有明确、统一的可操作性,从而使这一制度的初衷得到实现。
[Abstract]:On November 1, 2014, the new Administrative Litigation Law was enacted. Article 53 of the Act gives the administrative counterpart the right to request the court to review the normative documents on which the administrative act is charged. Article 64 provides the court's treatment of the results of the examination of normative documents. In order to establish the administrative proceedings in the regulatory documents attached to the review system. The first chapter mainly introduces the meaning and related problems of normative documents, analyzes the theoretical basis and practical necessity of such a system, and compares it with other related conceptual systems. The second chapter is mainly about the enactment of the relevant provisions of the new Administrative procedure Law on the incidental examination of the normative documents in the administrative litigation. It analyzes the progressive significance of similar regulations before the enactment of the new law and the main problems existing in the system after the enactment of the new law. Before the enactment of the new law, our country had relevant provisions for judicial review of normative documents in administrative proceedings, mainly from the self-qualitative rules of the Supreme people's Court, such as judicial interpretation and minutes of talks. These regulations endow the court with the "implicit power" to review normative documents in administrative proceedings by self-empowerment. The enactment of the new law is of great significance for the clarification and justification of this "implicit power" and the expansion of its contents. However, as far as the implementation of the new law is concerned, the actual effect of the new law is not ideal after its enactment, and there are some problems such as the imperfect construction of the system and the unreasonable provisions. The third chapter is a comparative study of the judicial review of abstract administrative acts in some major foreign countries (regions). Although there is no identical thing in the advanced countries or regions for the incidental review of administrative normative documents, However, there are very mature system achievements in the judicial review of abstract administrative acts, which has a positive reference significance for the construction of the system of incidental review of normative documents in administrative litigation in our country. The last chapter of this paper is mainly to construct the system of the new Administrative Litigation Law in the administrative litigation of regulatory documents attached to the review, Although there are many reasons that lead to the unsatisfactory effectiveness of the incidental review of normative documents in administrative litigation, there is no doubt that the supplement and amendment of the existing provisions from the view of law and hermeneutics have immediate effect at the present time, so, On the basis of existing theoretical achievements and systems at home and abroad, this paper constructs the system of incidental review of normative documents in administrative litigation in China from the aspects of review procedure, standards, methods and processing of examination results. So that such a system in the practice of administrative litigation has a clear, unified operability, so that the original intention of the system has been realized.
【学位授予单位】：中央民族大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.3
本文编号：2158380
[Abstract]:On November 1, 2014, the new Administrative Litigation Law was enacted. Article 53 of the Act gives the administrative counterpart the right to request the court to review the normative documents on which the administrative act is charged. Article 64 provides the court's treatment of the results of the examination of normative documents. In order to establish the administrative proceedings in the regulatory documents attached to the review system. The first chapter mainly introduces the meaning and related problems of normative documents, analyzes the theoretical basis and practical necessity of such a system, and compares it with other related conceptual systems. The second chapter is mainly about the enactment of the relevant provisions of the new Administrative procedure Law on the incidental examination of the normative documents in the administrative litigation. It analyzes the progressive significance of similar regulations before the enactment of the new law and the main problems existing in the system after the enactment of the new law. Before the enactment of the new law, our country had relevant provisions for judicial review of normative documents in administrative proceedings, mainly from the self-qualitative rules of the Supreme people's Court, such as judicial interpretation and minutes of talks. These regulations endow the court with the "implicit power" to review normative documents in administrative proceedings by self-empowerment. The enactment of the new law is of great significance for the clarification and justification of this "implicit power" and the expansion of its contents. However, as far as the implementation of the new law is concerned, the actual effect of the new law is not ideal after its enactment, and there are some problems such as the imperfect construction of the system and the unreasonable provisions. The third chapter is a comparative study of the judicial review of abstract administrative acts in some major foreign countries (regions). Although there is no identical thing in the advanced countries or regions for the incidental review of administrative normative documents, However, there are very mature system achievements in the judicial review of abstract administrative acts, which has a positive reference significance for the construction of the system of incidental review of normative documents in administrative litigation in our country. The last chapter of this paper is mainly to construct the system of the new Administrative Litigation Law in the administrative litigation of regulatory documents attached to the review, Although there are many reasons that lead to the unsatisfactory effectiveness of the incidental review of normative documents in administrative litigation, there is no doubt that the supplement and amendment of the existing provisions from the view of law and hermeneutics have immediate effect at the present time, so, On the basis of existing theoretical achievements and systems at home and abroad, this paper constructs the system of incidental review of normative documents in administrative litigation in China from the aspects of review procedure, standards, methods and processing of examination results. So that such a system in the practice of administrative litigation has a clear, unified operability, so that the original intention of the system has been realized.
【学位授予单位】：中央民族大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.3
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 李小菲;;行政诉讼中附带审查规范性文件研究[J];中国海事;2016年08期
2 章剑生;;论行政诉讼中规范性文件的合法性审查[J];福建行政学院学报;2016年03期
3 余军;张文;;行政规范性文件司法审查权的实效性考察[J];法学研究;2016年02期
4 王红卫;廖希飞;;行政诉讼中规范性文件附带审查制度研究[J];行政法学研究;2015年06期
5 杨士林;;试论行政诉讼中规范性文件合法性审查的限度[J];法学论坛;2015年05期
6 程琥;;新《行政诉讼法》中规范性文件附带审查制度研究[J];法律适用;2015年07期
7 周汉华;;规范性文件在《行政诉讼法》修改中的定位[J];法学;2014年08期
8 黄金荣;;“规范性文件”的法律界定及其效力[J];法学;2014年07期
9 何海波;;理想的《行政诉讼法》——《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》学者建议稿[J];行政法学研究;2014年02期
10 裴兆斌;张弘;;行政诉讼中规范性文件的证据性质及其法治意义[J];中国人民公安大学学报(社会科学版);2013年04期
相关会议论文 前1条
1 张雨梅;高宏亮;;回归与再造:规范性文件司法审查强度研究——以105则行政诉讼案例为分析样本[A];尊重司法规律与刑事法律适用研究（上）——全国法院第27届学术讨论会获奖论文集[C];2016年
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 ;关于行政诉讼法修正案(草案)的修改意见(上)[N];检察日报;2014年
，本文编号：2158380
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shoufeilunwen/shuoshibiyelunwen/2158380.html
