本文關(guān)鍵詞： 法治 行政權(quán)力 制約機(jī)制　出處：《山東理工大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：作為國(guó)家公權(quán)力的一種類型,行政權(quán)力是國(guó)家行政機(jī)關(guān)運(yùn)用特定的強(qiáng)制手段,為有效執(zhí)行國(guó)家意志,而依照憲法法律規(guī)定對(duì)全社會(huì)行政事務(wù)進(jìn)行管理的一種能力。同國(guó)家的其他權(quán)力相比,行政權(quán)力是最為活躍,最能直接作用于社會(huì)生活,加之其具有強(qiáng)制性、擴(kuò)張性和人格化傾向、高度權(quán)威性的特性,在缺乏有效制約的情況下,行政權(quán)力更容易被行政公職人員違法行使或者濫用,甚至被用來(lái)謀取私利,滋生腐敗現(xiàn)象,嚴(yán)重?fù)p害國(guó)家利益和行政相對(duì)人的合法權(quán)益。所以,對(duì)行政權(quán)力進(jìn)行制約尤為必要。這樣能夠保證行政權(quán)力的正常的運(yùn)行,保障行政公職人員的依法行政、清廉行政,保證行政權(quán)力真正被用來(lái)為人民謀利益。 我國(guó)歷來(lái)重視行政權(quán)力制約機(jī)制的建立和完善,尤其是改革開放30多年以來(lái),隨著我國(guó)法治建設(shè)進(jìn)程的不斷推進(jìn),我國(guó)已經(jīng)從立法、司法、行政機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部、社會(huì)力量四方面加強(qiáng)了對(duì)行政權(quán)力的限制,初步形成了行政權(quán)力的制約機(jī)制。但是,我國(guó)現(xiàn)行的行政權(quán)力制約機(jī)制還不夠完善,還存在一些影響其有效地發(fā)揮作用的問題。這些問題主要包括：人大對(duì)行政權(quán)力的制約缺乏力度；司法機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)行政權(quán)力的制約缺乏可操作性；行政機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部制約機(jī)制科學(xué)性不足；社會(huì)制約力量缺乏強(qiáng)化性。正是由于這些問題的存在,我國(guó)的行政權(quán)力制約機(jī)制才未能對(duì)防止行政權(quán)力的濫用產(chǎn)生實(shí)質(zhì)的影響。 本文深刻闡述了法治和行政權(quán)力制約機(jī)制的基本內(nèi)涵,以及二者的相互關(guān)系,認(rèn)真分析了我國(guó)行政權(quán)力制約機(jī)制面臨的主要問題,并在借鑒英國(guó)、美國(guó)、新加坡成功經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上,從加強(qiáng)國(guó)家權(quán)力機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)行政權(quán)力的制約,切實(shí)維護(hù)憲法的權(quán)威；加強(qiáng)行政機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部對(duì)行政權(quán)力的制約,規(guī)范行政機(jī)關(guān)依法行政；加強(qiáng)司法機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)行政權(quán)力的制約,切實(shí)維護(hù)司法公正；加強(qiáng)社會(huì)力量對(duì)行政權(quán)力的制約,營(yíng)造法治社會(huì)的氛圍四個(gè)方面來(lái)完善我國(guó)法治建設(shè)中的行政權(quán)力制約機(jī)制,力求能夠找到適合中國(guó)國(guó)情的行政權(quán)力制約機(jī)制,使行政權(quán)力的行使能夠規(guī)范化、法治化,從而有效地遏制行政權(quán)力腐敗,提高行政權(quán)力為公民服務(wù)的效率,推動(dòng)我國(guó)法治建設(shè)。
[Abstract]:As a type of national public power, administrative power is the use of specific coercive means by state administrative organs for the effective implementation of the national will. Compared with other powers of the country, the administrative power is the most active, the most direct effect in the social life, plus it is mandatory. Expansionary and personal tendency, highly authoritative characteristics, in the absence of effective constraints, administrative power is more likely to be illegally exercised or abused by administrative public officials, or even used for private interests. Breeding corruption serious damage to the interests of the state and the legitimate rights and interests of administrative counterpart. So it is particularly necessary to restrict the administrative power so as to ensure the normal operation of administrative power. To ensure the administration of administrative public officials according to law, clean administration, to ensure that administrative power is really used for the benefit of the people. Our country has always attached importance to the establishment and improvement of administrative power restriction mechanism, especially since the reform and opening up for more than 30 years, with the continuous progress of the construction of the rule of law in China, our country has been from the legislative, judicial, administrative organs inside. The four aspects of social forces have strengthened the restriction of administrative power and formed the restriction mechanism of administrative power. However, the current administrative power restriction mechanism of our country is not perfect enough. There are also some problems that affect its effective performance. These problems mainly include: the lack of restriction on administrative power by the people's Congress; The restriction of administrative power by judicial organs is lack of maneuverability; The internal restriction mechanism of administrative organs is not scientific enough; Due to the existence of these problems, the restriction mechanism of administrative power in our country has not had a substantial effect on preventing the abuse of administrative power. This paper deeply expounds the basic connotation of the rule of law and the restriction mechanism of administrative power, and the relationship between the two, analyzes the main problems faced by the administrative power restriction mechanism of our country, and draws lessons from the United Kingdom and the United States. On the basis of the successful experience of Singapore, we should strengthen the restriction of the state power to the administrative power and safeguard the authority of the constitution. Strengthening the restriction of administrative power within administrative organs and standardizing the administration of administrative organs according to law; To strengthen the restriction of the judicial organs on the administrative power and to safeguard the judicial justice; Strengthen the social forces to restrict the administrative power, create the atmosphere of the society ruled by law to perfect the administrative power restriction mechanism in the construction of the rule of law in our country, and try to find the administrative power restriction mechanism suitable for the national conditions of China. So that the exercise of administrative power can be standardized, rule by law, so as to effectively contain the corruption of administrative power, improve the efficiency of administrative power for citizens, promote the construction of the rule of law in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D630;D920.0

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 肖祥;論道德他律與權(quán)力約束[J];東岳論叢;2004年02期

2 李家亮;劉稚;;新加坡廉政制度建設(shè)的特點(diǎn)及啟示[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年31期

3 邰祖巖;;國(guó)外官員財(cái)產(chǎn)申報(bào)制度的實(shí)施狀況及啟示[J];領(lǐng)導(dǎo)科學(xué);2010年20期

4 楊海坤;實(shí)現(xiàn)憲政目標(biāo)下的中國(guó)行政法治[J];法學(xué)論壇;2005年02期

5 吳斌;;中國(guó)“法治”思想的歷史觀察與思考[J];社科縱橫;2008年06期

6 文玉;彭飛武;;英美行政監(jiān)督制度比較探析[J];華北水利水電學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社科版);2009年06期

7 李勝利;李軍;;我國(guó)行政權(quán)力制約體系中存在的問題及其應(yīng)對(duì)策略[J];行政與法;2009年12期

8 楊海坤;擺脫行政訴訟制度困境的出路[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);1994年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 崔劍侖;論當(dāng)代中國(guó)行政監(jiān)督[D];吉林大學(xué);2004年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 趙明學(xué);試論依法治國(guó)與人大監(jiān)督[D];延邊大學(xué);2001年

2 唐秋玲;我國(guó)公務(wù)員行政責(zé)任追究機(jī)制探討[D];湘潭大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：1470495