本文關(guān)鍵詞： 預(yù)防性訴訟 行政訴訟 個(gè)人隱私 反信息公開訴訟　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：行政機(jī)關(guān)建立信息公開的制度，在一定的程度上實(shí)現(xiàn)了行政相對(duì)人對(duì)于信息的知悉的權(quán)利。但是對(duì)于所要進(jìn)行公示的內(nèi)容在包含有第三人的隱私權(quán)或者商業(yè)秘密的情況下，，如何維護(hù)自己的合法權(quán)益不受侵犯？此時(shí)行政機(jī)關(guān)公開信息則會(huì)損害到第三人的隱私權(quán)和商業(yè)秘密。從目前的實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)來看，信息公開案件中的第三人常常提起反信息公開訴訟的方式來維護(hù)自己的權(quán)益。從成文法上，現(xiàn)在的法律對(duì)于反信息公開訴訟的規(guī)定并不完善。關(guān)于反信息公開訴訟的規(guī)則也都停留在初始的狀態(tài)。從國外的訴訟制度發(fā)展歷史來看，各國的訴訟制度的發(fā)展軌跡是從開始的重視事后救濟(jì)的訴訟制度發(fā)展到反信息公開等的事前預(yù)防性訴訟制度。反信息公開訴訟作為預(yù)防性訴訟制度的典型代表與以往的普通行政訴訟具有很大的不同之處，其具有很大的優(yōu)越性。信息公開是在保障公民知情權(quán)的層面出發(fā)，而反信息公開訴訟是在保障公民隱私權(quán)和商業(yè)秘密的角度思考。信息公開和反信息公開是一個(gè)問題的兩面，不可偏廢其一。我國的《信息公開條例》和《行政訴訟法》為反信息公開訴訟提供了制度基礎(chǔ)，但是對(duì)于反信息公開的起訴規(guī)則和審判規(guī)則并不清晰，許多問題都只是原則性的規(guī)定并沒有有效的可操作的措施。因此這些問題的分析對(duì)于反信息公開訴訟的順利進(jìn)行和相關(guān)人的權(quán)利保護(hù)都具有十分重要的意義。 本文除引言一共有四部分： 第一部分，反信息公開訴訟的基礎(chǔ)理論問題。首先，從反信息公開訴訟的概念入手分析反信息公開訴訟的預(yù)防性和暫時(shí)停止執(zhí)行性等特征。其次，分析反信息公開訴訟存在的法理基礎(chǔ)，反信息公開訴訟是保護(hù)公民“隱私權(quán)”和商業(yè)秘密的需要，同時(shí)也是行政相對(duì)人和行政相關(guān)人權(quán)益平衡的要求。最后，分析我國建立反信息公開訴訟制度的目的和意義：保護(hù)“個(gè)人隱私”和商業(yè)秘密，有助于對(duì)我國保護(hù)公民權(quán)益的方式進(jìn)一步的進(jìn)行完善，并且在現(xiàn)有制度的基礎(chǔ)上使我國的行政訴訟制度更進(jìn)一步。 第二部分，主要敘述當(dāng)代反信息公開訴訟制度的發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀，從我國的現(xiàn)在的立法制度講起，分析我國在反信息公開制度的現(xiàn)狀和不足，并對(duì)國外的反信息公開訴訟制度的內(nèi)容進(jìn)行解析。 第三部分，在上述分析的基礎(chǔ)之上，討論我國的反信息公開訴訟制度在起訴規(guī)則的有關(guān)問題，分析起訴規(guī)則中的法律依據(jù)和訴訟當(dāng)事人問題。 第四部分，本部分針對(duì)反信息公開之訴的審理規(guī)則進(jìn)行分析。在法庭審理中分為法律審和事實(shí)審還有程序性方面的審查。接著分析反信息公開訴訟的判決種類，如禁制令判決、給付判決、撤銷判決、賠償判決。 總之，通過建立反信息公開訴訟制度的方式來保護(hù)信息公開過程中行政相關(guān)人的合法權(quán)益，保護(hù)“個(gè)人的隱私”和商業(yè)秘密不受侵犯。
[Abstract]:Administrative organs establish a system of information disclosure. To a certain extent, the administrative counterpart has realized the right to know the information. But the content to be published includes the privacy of the third party or the case of trade secrets. How to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests are not infringed? At this time, the public information of administrative organs will damage the privacy and trade secrets of the third party. In the case of information disclosure, the third party often brings a suit against the disclosure of information in order to protect his own rights and interests. The current law for the anti-information disclosure litigation provisions are not perfect. The rules on anti-information disclosure litigation are also staying in the initial state. From the history of the development of foreign litigation system. The development track of litigation system in various countries is from the beginning of the litigation system which attaches importance to the relief after the event to the system of preventive action in advance, such as counter-disclosure of information, etc. As a typical representative of the system of preventive action, the action against disclosure of information is the representative of the system of preventive litigation. The common administrative litigation in the past has great differences. Information disclosure is based on the protection of citizens' right to know. The anti-information disclosure litigation is to protect the privacy of citizens and the perspective of trade secrets. Information disclosure and anti-information disclosure are two sides of the same problem. In our country, the regulations on Information publicity and the Administrative procedure Law provide the system basis for the anti-information publicity litigation, but the rules of prosecution and the trial rules for the anti-information disclosure are not clear. Many problems are just rules of principle and there are no effective operational measures. Therefore, the analysis of these problems is of great significance to the smooth progress of the anti-information public litigation and the protection of the rights of related persons. In addition to the introduction, there are four parts in this paper: The first part, the basic theoretical issues of anti-information disclosure litigation. First, from the concept of anti-information disclosure litigation analysis of anti-information disclosure litigation preventive and temporary suspension of the characteristics. Secondly. Analysis of the legal basis of anti-information disclosure litigation, anti-information disclosure litigation is the protection of citizens'"privacy" and business secrets, but also the requirements of the balance of the rights and interests of the administrative counterpart and administrative related persons. Finally. This paper analyzes the purpose and significance of establishing the anti-information publicity litigation system in China: the protection of "personal privacy" and trade secrets is helpful to the further improvement of the way of protecting the rights and interests of citizens in our country. And on the basis of the existing system, our administrative litigation system further. The second part mainly describes the current situation of the development of the contemporary anti-information disclosure litigation system, from the current legislative system of our country, analyzes the current situation and deficiencies of the anti-information disclosure system in our country. And the content of the foreign anti-information publicity litigation system is analyzed. The third part, on the basis of the above analysis, discusses the problems related to the prosecution rules of the anti-information publicity litigation system in China, and analyzes the legal basis and litigant issues in the prosecution rules. Part 4th. In this part, the author analyzes the hearing rules of anti-information disclosure suit. It is divided into legal trial and factual trial and procedural review in the court trial. Then, it analyzes the types of judgment in the anti-information public litigation. Such as injunction judgment, payment judgment, annulment judgment, compensation judgment. In a word, we can protect the legitimate rights and interests of the administrative related persons in the process of information disclosure by establishing a lawsuit system against the disclosure of information, and protect "personal privacy" and trade secrets from being infringed.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 章志遠(yuǎn);;行政訴訟類型化模式比較與選擇[J];比較法研究;2006年05期

2 李廣宇;;反信息公開行政訴訟問題研究[J];法律適用;2007年08期

3 劉穎;;挑戰(zhàn)或機(jī)遇:政府信息公開訴訟對(duì)我國行政審判的理論及實(shí)踐意義[J];法律適用;2009年04期

4 劉東亮;;我國行政行為司法審查標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之理性選擇[J];法商研究;2006年02期

5 章志遠(yuǎn);;給付行政與行政訴訟法的新發(fā)展——以行政給付訴訟為例[J];法商研究;2008年04期

6 楊偉東,張艷蕊;我國起訴不停止執(zhí)行原則探索[J];法學(xué)雜志;1997年05期

7 胡肖華;論預(yù)防性行政訴訟[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1999年06期

8 劉飛;行政訴訟類型制度探析——德國法的視角[J];法學(xué);2004年03期

9 伏創(chuàng)宇;;反公開訴訟中的保護(hù)機(jī)制探析[J];時(shí)代法學(xué);2009年02期

本文編號(hào)：1479668