發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-07-24 15:46

【摘要】：關(guān)于檢察機(jī)關(guān)參與行政公益訴訟的角色定位,原告人說(shuō)難與客觀義務(wù)相融,公益代表人說(shuō)源于對(duì)域外制度和理論的"剪裁",公訴人說(shuō)囿于制度調(diào)和而難以擴(kuò)展,只有法律監(jiān)督者說(shuō)兼具制度基礎(chǔ)和司法實(shí)踐支撐。以法律監(jiān)督而不是公益代表為本位的行政公益訴訟,意味著權(quán)力之間平衡制約的新型關(guān)系形成,對(duì)實(shí)現(xiàn)行政權(quán)力行使的法治化及監(jiān)督制度本身的克制與平衡,具有非常重要的意義。對(duì)此,需加強(qiáng)"檢察建議、行政公益訴訟"二元監(jiān)督模式的參與和民主要素,暫緩采用客觀訴訟理論,明確訴前程序的價(jià)值和定位,逐步完善我國(guó)的行政公益訴訟制度。
[Abstract]:As to the role orientation of procuratorial organs in administrative public interest litigation, the plaintiff says that it is difficult to blend with objective obligations, the public welfare representative says that it originates from the "tailoring" of the extraterritorial system and theory, and the public prosecutor says that it is difficult to expand because of the system harmony. Only the legal supervisor theory has the system foundation and the judicial practice support. The administrative public interest litigation, which is based on legal supervision rather than public welfare representative, means the formation of a new relationship of balance and restriction between the powers, and the restraint and balance of the administrative power exercise of the rule of law and the supervision system itself. Of great significance. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the participation and democratic elements of the dualistic supervision mode of "Procuratorial suggestion, Administrative Public interest Litigation", to suspend the use of objective litigation theory, to clarify the value and orientation of the pre-litigation procedure, and to gradually perfect the administrative public interest litigation system in our country.
【作者單位】： 山東大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 裘t，

本文編號(hào)：2141865