本文選題：行政解釋 + 行政訴訟�。� 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：在我國行政法學(xué)中，對于行政解釋的研究并不多見，有限的一些研究，多數(shù)都具有非常強(qiáng)的理論性和抽象性，但對實(shí)踐的關(guān)注卻不夠深入。應(yīng)該說，一些研究者注意從理論的層面來分析行政解釋的概念和特征，并對實(shí)踐中的問題提出批判和改進(jìn)的意見，這種積極的態(tài)度是值得肯定的，但是很多研究者僅僅重視理論，卻忽視了行政解釋方法和解釋規(guī)范在實(shí)踐中的狀態(tài)。即使有些研究者注意到了行政解釋在實(shí)踐中的問題，也沒有對行政解釋在實(shí)定法中的地位和在審判實(shí)踐中的效力狀態(tài)進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)的研究。 要研究一種形似法律淵源的概念，首先要對這一事物的產(chǎn)生和實(shí)定法上的規(guī)定進(jìn)行全面的了解。否則，，在對一種形似法律淵源的事物的概念、特點(diǎn)、本質(zhì)、類型、效力等等問題全都沒有一個清晰、系統(tǒng)的認(rèn)識之前，就急著給出改進(jìn)的意見，恐怕會有南轅北轍的危險(xiǎn)。 在閱讀相關(guān)文獻(xiàn)的過程中，筆者關(guān)注了行政解釋規(guī)范和方法在我國從無到有的歷程，以及各家各派的各種分類方法，并在其中發(fā)現(xiàn)了一種較為特殊的、與行政解釋在我國的產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展相關(guān)性非常緊密的分類方法，即所謂制定解釋和應(yīng)用解釋的分類方法。這種分類方法不僅僅是我國立法解釋和其他各種法律解釋之間的區(qū)分方法，同樣也被用于我國行政解釋的內(nèi)部區(qū)分。立足于這一分類法之上，筆者通過從上到下逐級梳理我國的法律規(guī)范及相應(yīng)行政機(jī)關(guān)對其擁有的解釋權(quán)，列出了行政解釋內(nèi)部不同層級的效力關(guān)系。 本文的主要觀點(diǎn)是：行政解釋的內(nèi)部存在著以是否制定主體來區(qū)分的兩種不同效力的解釋類型，相對而言，制定主體對自己制定的法律文件的解釋屬于制定解釋，其效力更高；反之則屬于應(yīng)用解釋甚至無權(quán)解釋，其效力低于制定解釋。而根據(jù)我國既有的法律淵源的層級，可以進(jìn)一步將相對應(yīng)的各種行政解釋歸入相應(yīng)的層級中進(jìn)行進(jìn)一步的細(xì)分，并最終列出各種主體對于各種解釋對象所做的行政解釋的詳細(xì)效力層級。 本文的寫作分為四個部分，第一部分是概念和理念上的分析，首先對既有行政解釋概念進(jìn)行歸納，隨后闡述本文的研究旨趣；第二部分是對現(xiàn)行憲法和各種其他法律文件中的行政解釋規(guī)定進(jìn)行梳理，通過整理我國歷史上和現(xiàn)實(shí)中的行政解釋規(guī)定，發(fā)現(xiàn)行政解釋內(nèi)在的效力邏輯，并試圖理清解釋主體、解釋對象和解釋文件的效力之間的關(guān)系；第三部分是對中國行政解釋在訴訟中所處地位的歸納分析，包括行政解釋在我國行政訴訟中的效力層級，以及效力層級處于不同狀態(tài)的行政解釋在行政訴訟中的適用，該部分通過將第二部分梳理出的行政解釋效力的詳細(xì)層級與我國現(xiàn)行行政訴訟法律規(guī)定中對法律淵源的效力、合法性或合理性的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)相結(jié)合，提供了一種用以判斷某一行政解釋是否能夠在行政訴訟中得到適用的實(shí)定法上的進(jìn)路，并試圖從案例中總結(jié)出常用和可用的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。第四部分則是結(jié)論部分。
[Abstract]:In the administrative law of China, there are few studies on administrative interpretation, and some of the limited studies have very strong theoretical and abstract nature, but the attention to practice is not deep enough. It should be said that some researchers pay attention to the analysis of the concept and characteristics of administrative interpretation from the theoretical level and criticize the problems in practice. This positive attitude is worth affirming, but many researchers only attach importance to the theory, but ignore the state of administrative interpretation and interpretation in practice. Even some researchers have noticed the problems in the practice of administrative interpretation, and there is no status and practice of administrative interpretation in the actual law. The effectiveness of the state is systematically studied.
In order to study a concept like the origin of the law, we must first make a comprehensive understanding of the emergence of this thing and the provisions on the actual law. Otherwise, there is no clear concept, characteristics, nature, type and effectiveness of a kind of things like the origin of the law. Fear will be in danger of the opposite direction.
In the process of reading related literature, the author pays attention to the history of administrative interpretation norms and methods in our country and the various classifications of various schools, and finds a more special classification method, which is very close to the production and development of administrative interpretation in China, that is, to formulate interpretation and application. This classification method is not only a distinction between our country's legislative interpretation and other legal interpretations, but also the internal distinction of the administrative interpretation of our country. Based on this classification, the author combs the legal norms of our country from top to bottom and the corresponding solutions of the corresponding administrative organs. The right of interpretation lists the effective relationship between different levels of administrative interpretation.
The main point of this article is that there are two different types of interpretations in the interior of the administrative interpretation. In contrast, the interpretations of the legal documents made by the main body belong to the interpretations, and their effectiveness is higher; on the contrary, the interpretations of the legal documents are more effective than the interpretations, and their effectiveness is lower than the interpretation. According to the level of the existing legal origin of our country, we can further subdivide the corresponding administrative interpretations into the corresponding levels, and finally list the detailed effectiveness levels of the administrative interpretations made by various subjects for various interpretive objects.
The writing of this article is divided into four parts. The first part is the analysis of concept and concept. First, it summarizes the concept of the existing administrative interpretation, and then expounds the purpose of the study. The second part is the combing of the administrative interpretation of the current constitution and various other legal documents, through sorting out the historical and practical aspects of our country. The political interpretation stipulates that the internal validity logic of the administrative interpretation is found and the relationship between the interpretive subject and the validity of the interpretive documents is clarifying; the third part is the inductive analysis of the status of the administrative interpretation in the lawsuit, including the effectiveness level of the administrative interpretation in the administrative litigation of our country, and the effect of the level of the administrative interpretation. The application of the administrative interpretation of the same state in administrative litigation, this part provides a way to judge whether a certain administrative interpretation can be used by combining the detailed hierarchy of the effectiveness of the second part of the administrative interpretation with the validity of the legal origin, the validity of the legal or the reasonableness of the legal provisions in the current administrative litigation of China. In the administrative litigation, it is applicable to the actual law, and tries to summarize the common and available judging criteria from the case. The fourth part is the conclusion.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 孔小紅;法律解釋的理論和實(shí)踐[J];北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1988年03期

2 桁林;國民待遇與經(jīng)濟(jì)法解釋中的若干問題[J];北京市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年01期

3 吳萍;完善司法解釋體制的幾個問題[J];中共長春市委黨校學(xué)報(bào);2004年06期

4 楊立人;檔案法律解釋體制探討[J];檔案學(xué)通訊;2003年01期

5 錢大軍,張成元;法律解釋的必為性和可行性[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2002年07期

6 高秦偉;;論其他形式的行政法規(guī)范解釋[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2008年05期

7 陶凱元;中國法律解釋制度現(xiàn)狀之剖析[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年06期

8 陳興良;法的解釋與解釋的法[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1997年04期

9 惠生武;論行政解釋的基本范疇及其分類[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年03期

10 趙玉增;;從法律解釋內(nèi)涵析我國法律解釋體制[J];法律方法;2003年00期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 王旭;行政法解釋學(xué)研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2008年

2 祖燕;行政解釋論[D];中國政法大學(xué);2009年

本文編號：1805885